VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 725/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE ITO WARD 3 (3) JAIPUR CUKE VS. SHRI GAJ SINGH ALSISAR HAVELI S.C. ROAD, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ANVPS 6124 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI N.S. VYAS, CA LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27/11/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 /01/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 28-08-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2009-10 RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE SUB-REGISTRAR FOR THE LAND UNDER QUESTION, WHICH IS AGAINST THE MANDATE OF SECTION 5 0C OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ITA NO.725/JP/2014 ITO , WARD- 3 (3), JAIPUR VS. SHRI GAJ SINGH, JAIP UR . 2 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 59,08,508/- ON ACCOUNT OF CAPITAL G AIN MADE BY THE AO BY INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 50C. 2.1 AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS APPEALED AGAI NST WAS PASSED IN PROCEEDINGS UNDERTAKEN BY LD. AO CONSEQUENT TO 263 ORDER PASSED ON 30- 03-2013. THE ASSESSEE HAD THE CHALLENGED 263 ACTION BEFORE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH, WHICH WAS PLEASED TO QUASH THE COMMISSIONERS SAID 263 ORDER DTD. 30-03-2013, VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 28-02-2014 IN ITA NO. 529/JP/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 BY FOLLOWING OBSERV ATION. 5. THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF PROV ES THAT THE VERY SAME ISSUE, WHICH HAS BEEN REVISED BY LD. CIT WAS EXAMINED AND INVESTIGATED INTO IN DETAIL AND THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE BEST OF PRUDENCE AND HA S TAKEN A PLAUSIBLE VIEW ON THE CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE. THUS, TH E ORDER IN QUESTION CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ERRONEOUS. ACCORDINGL Y THE ORDER CANNOT BE REVISED UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 26 3 OF THE ACT. WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT DATED 30- 03-2013 IN THE ASSESSEE'S CASE AND RESTORE THE ORDE R OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 2.2 THE LD. DR IS HEARD. 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE 263 ACTION ITSELF HAS BE EN QUASHED, THEREFORE, ITA NO.725/JP/2014 ITO , WARD- 3 (3), JAIPUR VS. SHRI GAJ SINGH, JAIP UR . 3 THE CONSEQUENT ORDER BECOMES NULL AND VOID. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 /01/ 2016. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 12 /01/2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO, WARD- 3 (3), JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI GAJ SINGH , JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.725/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR