KOMAL CHANDIRAMANI, Jaipur V. ITO, Alwar

ITA 876/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59522 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K MEENA
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

1 ITA 876-11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH SMC JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 876/JP/2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08. SMT. KOMAL CHANDIRAMANI, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFIC ER, 407, DBC TOWER, OPP. HOTEL GANGAUR, WARD 1(2), NEAR PINK CITY PETROL PUMP, JAIPUR. M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIL SHARMA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D.K. MEENA DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.01.2012. ORDER DATE OF ORDER : 09.01.2012. PER R.K. GUPTA, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE IS AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 34,242/- TOWARDS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO NOTICE D THAT ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF PROPERTY SITUATE D AT VIDHYADHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR AT RS. 2,02,318/-. THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT M ADE CORRECT CALCULATION, THEREFORE, HE COMPUTED SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 2,36,560/-. IN THIS WAY AN ADDITION OF RS. 34,242/- WAS MADE BY AO. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS CONFI RMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. 2 4. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT BROK ERAGE OF RS. 15,000/- WAS PAID TO ONE SHRI VIKAS JANGID, DEDUCTION OF THE SAME HAS NO T BEEN ALLOWED THOUGH THE CONFIRMATORY LETTER WAS FILED BEFORE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE LD. CIT (A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THI S PROOF OF EVIDENCE BY OBSERVING THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS FILED BEFORE THE A O. ACCORDINGLY ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS NOT ADMITTED. 5. THE LD. D/R STATED THAT IF THIS IS THE FACT, THE N MATTER CAN BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. 6. THE LD. A/R DID NOT OBJECT THE CONTENTION OF LD. D/R. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO TO EXAMINE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE BR OKERAGE PAID BY ASSESSEE AT RS. 15,000/-. THE AO SHOULD CALL UPON THE BROKER FOR V ERIFICATION OR ASSESSEE SHOULD PRODUCE THE PERSON TO WHOM THE BROKERAGE HAS BEEN PAID SO T HAT FACTUM CAN BE ASCERTAINED. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 8. NEXT ISSUE IS AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 76,903/- TOWARDS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. 9. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO NOTICE D THAT ASSESSEE HAS SOLD GOLD ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 259.83 GRAMS AMOUNTING TO RS. 2, 94,793/- ON VARIOUS DATES DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. AS PER ORDER OF AO, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DECLARED THE SALE OF THE GOLD. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, TH E ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE DETAILS OF GOLD PURCHASED. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT G OLD WAS GIVEN DURING HER MARRIAGE ON 4.6.1985 AND SUBMITTED SALE BILLS OF GOLD JEWELLERY . AS ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVE THE PURCHASE OF GOLD ORNAMENTS, THEREFORE, THE AO TAKEN THE GOLD RATE AT RS. 2,149/- PER 10 3 GRAMS AS ON 12.11.1985 FOR COMPUTING LONG TERM CAPI TAL GAIN. IN THIS WAY, AN ADDITION OF RS. 76,903/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN. THIS ACTION OF THE AO HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT (A). 10. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE HA S PURCHASED A FLAT FOR RS. 35.00 LACS IN THE SAID YEAR, THEREFORE, DEDUCTION UNDER SECTIO N 54F IS ALLOWABLE, WAS REJECTED BY LD. CIT (A) AS THIS CLAIM WAS NOT MADE BEFORE THE AO. 11. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, I FIND THAT ASSESSEE DESERVES TO SUCCEED IN THIS GROUND. THIS IS A MATTER OF FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS SOLD GOLD JEWELLERY DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND IN THE SAID YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE FLAT. THEREFORE, DEDUCTION UNDER SEC TION 54F IS ALLOWABLE AS PER IT ACT. ACCORDINGLY, I DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION AFTER VERIFICATION OF THIS FACT, AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D IN PART. 13. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 .01.2012. SD/- ( R.K. GUPTA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR, D/- COPY FORWARDED TO :- SMT. KOMAL CHANDIRAMANI, JAIPUR. THE ITO WARD 1(2), ALWAR. THE CIT (A) THE CIT THE D/R GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 876/JP/2011) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JAIPUR. 4