Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7823 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 year(s) 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
22-12-2017
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Assessment Year
2010-2011
Appeal Filed On
11-11-2014
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6860/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI MICHAEL DOMINIC COLACO, MANICKPUR, NAVPADA, NEAR CRICKET GROUND, VASAI, DIST THANE-401 202 PAN: ABDPC7633F VS. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-4, ASHAR IT PARK, 6 TH FLOOR, ROAD NO.16-Z, AMBIKA NAGAR WAGLE INDL. ESTATE, THANE-400 604 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAMESH PRABHU, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI T.A. KHAN, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 06.12.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.12.2017 O R D E R PER D.T. GARASIA , JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.08.2014 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE AS UNDER: THE ASSESSEE SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR A SUM OF RS.3,23,00,000/- AND RECEIVED THE LAST INSTALLMENT OF THE LAND AMOUNTING TO RS.10,00,000/- ON 27.08.08. THE ASSES SEE HAS HANDED OVER THE POSSESSION OF LAND. THE ASSESSEES LAND S UITATED AT VILLAGE PELHAR, VASAI WAS LOCATED 8 KMS. BEYOND THE LOCAL L IMITS OF THE ITA NO.6860/M/2014 SHRI MICHAEL DOMINIC COLACO 2 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. THEREFORE, IT WAS NOT A CAP ITAL ASSET AS PER SECTION 2(14)(III) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, IT IS NO T SUBJECT TO CAPITAL GAINS. HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS THE AO) DID NOT ACCEPT THE SAME. 3. MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A). BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SOME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BUT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON TH E GROUND THAT THE REVISED RETURN WAS NOT FILED. THEREFORE, HE DI D NOT ADMIT THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS BEFORE US THAT WERE NOT ADMITTED BY LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT ADDIT IONAL GROUND CANNOT BE ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. BUT IN OUR OPINION THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS CAN BE AD MITTED AT ANY STAGE OF TIME. WE FIND THAT IN CASE OF CIT VS. PR UTHVI BROKERS AND SHAREHOLDERS PVT. LTD. (2012) 349 ITR 336 (BOM.) W HEREIN THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT UNDER SECTI ON 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MAY, AFTER G IVING BOTH THE PARTIES AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, PASS SUCH OR DERS THEREON AS IT THINKS FIT. THE POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN DEALING W ITH THE APPEAL IS THUS EXPRESSED IN WIDEST POSSIBLE TERMS. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE ADMIT THE CL AIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND MATTER IS RESTORED TO AO TO DECIDE IT AFRESH, AS PER LAW. ITA NO.6860/M/2014 SHRI MICHAEL DOMINIC COLACO 3 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.12.2017. SD/- SD/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (D.T. GARASIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 22.12.2017. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.
