The Income Tax Officer, Muktsar V. Sh. Manpreet Singh Badal, Muktsar

ITA 616/ASR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3403 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-02-2019
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Capital asset; Tax effect
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 616/ASR./2015 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-II(2), MUKTSAR VS SHRI. MANPREET SINGH BADAL, S/O SHRI. GURDAS SINGH BADAL, VILL BADAL, DISTT. MUKTSAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AFJPB2460B ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. ASHWANI KALIA, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. RATINDE R KAUR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 20 .02 .201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 21 .02 .201 9 ORDER PER N. S. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), BATHINDA DATED 18.09.2015. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED A LETTER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(JUDL.), BATHINDA DATED 19.02.2019 SEEKING PERMISSION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL AS THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL WAS BELOW THE PRESC RIBED MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L. 3. WE FIND THAT THE LETTER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX(JUDL.), BATHINDA DATED 19.02.2019 READS AS UNDE R: 2. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS STATED THAT PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS IMPOSED AFTER CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON S ALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY MEMBERS OF PUNJAB CO- OPERATIVE HOUSING BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. THE ADDITIO NS ITA NO. 616/ASR ./2015 MANPREET SINGH B ADAL 2 INVOLVED FULL AMOUNT OF SALE CONSIDERATION ACCRUED TO THE MEMBERS WHICH INCLUDED MONETARY CONSIDERATION AND VALUE OF BUILT UP FLAT TO BE RECEIVED BY THE MEMBERS. 3. THE HIGH COURT IN C.S. ATWAL, SUBSEQUENTLY UPHEL D BY THE SUPREME COURT, HELD THAT CAPITAL GAIN WAS EXIGI BLE ONLY ON THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE MEMB ERS ON ACTUAL TRANSFER OF LAND BY THE SOCIETY TO THE DEVELOPERS DURING THE YEAR. IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT, THE ADDITION WAS RESTRICTED TO PROPORTIONATE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEES ON ACTUAL TRANSFER OF LAND TO THE DEVELOP ER DURING THE YEAR. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS, THE AMOUNT OF PENALT Y ALSO HAS TO BE REDUCED PROPORTIONATELY ON THE AMOUN T OF CAPITAL GAINS CHARGEABLE TO TAX AFTER GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN VIEW OF PROVISIO NS OF SECTION 275(1A) OF THE ACT. HENCE, IN OUR HUMBLE VI EW, THE TAX EFFECT IN THE CASES GETS REDUCED TO THE AMO UNTS, WHICH ARE BELOW THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCRIBED IN INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2018 FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF T HE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/02/2019) SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (N. S. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCO UNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/02/2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR