Income tax Officer Ward-1(2), RAIPUR (CG) V. Smt Pratima Bothra, RAIPUR (CG)

ITA 79/BIL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0538 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: S R RAO
• Keywords: Capital asset

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 79 /BLPR/201 2 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), RAIPUR VS. SMT. PRATIMA BOTHRA, M/S. AJAY TRADERS, M.G. ROAD, RAIPUR PAN : ADEPB 9654 J / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI S.K. MEENA, DR ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI S.R. RAO, AR / DATE OF HEARING : 08 / 10 /2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09 / 10 /201 5 / O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) , RAIPUR (CG) DATED 15 . 0 3 .201 2 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 1 0. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL READS AS UNDER: - WHETHER IN LAW AND ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,16,876/ - MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. 3. THE ONLY DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DENIAL OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT ITS LAND IS AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH IS BEYOND 8 ITA NO. 79/BLPR/ 2012 ITO VS. SMT PRATIMA BOTHRA AY: 200 9 - 1 0 2 KMS FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS. THE RELEVANT FACTS, AS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFER, READ AS UNDER: - 4. NOW, THE MOST PERTINENT QUESTION IN THE CASE IS WHETHER THE LAND SOLD DURING THE PERIOD WAS A CAPITAL ASSET OR NOT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF LOCATION OF THE LAND AND NECESSARY EVIDENCE FOR IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM THAT IT IS EXEM PT FROM BEING A CAPITAL ASSET. IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUERY, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED TWO LETTERS, ONE FROM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER FROM PWD (N.H. DIVISION) AS INFORMATION SOUGHT BY ONE SHRI SUKHDEV SAHU, PANDRI, RAIPUR UNDER RTI ACT. IT HAS BE EN MENTIONED IN THE LETTER THAT MANA BASTI IS 8.6 KM FROM THE MUNIC IPAL LIMITS OF RAIPUR. HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN THE FACT, THE INSPECTOR OF THIS OFFICE WAS ASSIGNED THE JOB TO ENQUIRE INTO THE MATTER AND SUBMIT THE REQUISITE REPORT. THE INSPECTOR S REPORT DATED 25.11.2011 IN THIS REGARD STATES THAT THE LAND AT VILLAGE MANA IS NOT MORE THAN 7 KMS ON TAKING ANY OF THE TWO ROUTES AVAILABLE TO REACH MANA FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF RAIPUR. 4. THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION ON THE BAS IS OF CERTIFICATE FROM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND PWD (N.H. DIVISION). THE REVENUE, AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. FROM THE FACTS, AS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IT IS EVIDENT THAT BEFORE HIM THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED TWO LETTERS ONE FROM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER FROM PWD (N.H. DIVIS ION). AS PER BOTH LETTERS, THE LAND IS 8.6 KMS FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF RAIPUR. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE INSPECTOR OF INCOME - TAX TO ENQUIRE INTO THE MATTER AND SUBMIT THE REQUISITE REPORT. THE INSPECTOR HAS INFORMED THAT THE CONCERNED LAND IS NOT MORE THAN 7 KMS FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF RAIPUR. WE AGREE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) THAT WHEN THERE IS A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CONCERNED ITA NO. 79/BLPR/ 2012 ITO VS. SMT PRATIMA BOTHRA AY: 200 9 - 1 0 3 AUTHORITIES, I.E., MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND PWD (N.H. DIVISION); THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THOSE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES SIMPLY ON THE BASIS OF INSPECTORS REPORT. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT(A) WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN ACCEPTING THE DISTANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AS WELL A S EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS SUSTAINED AND THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 9 TH OCTOBER, 2015 AT RAIPUR . SD/ - SD/ - (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.D. AGRAWAL) VICE - PRESIDENT RAIPUR ; DATED 09 / 1 0 /201 5 BIJU T., PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, RAIPUR 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, RAIPUR