Shri Nirbhay Singh, Mohali V. ITO, W-6(4), Mohali

ITA 974/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7799 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GEETINDER MANN JCIT DR
• Keywords: Capital asset; Additional evidence
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH .., ! '# #$ %, & '( BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, J M ITA NO. 972/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SMT. SURJIT KAUR W/O HAQIKAT SINGH VILL: LAKHNAUR, THE: KHARAR, MOHALI THE ITO WARD 6(4), MOHALI PAN NO: EPRPK9194H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA NO. 973/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI BHARBHUR SINGH S/O BHUPINDER SINGH VILL: LAKHNAUR, THE: KHARAR, MOHALI THE ITO WARD 6(4), MOHALI PAN NO: JLTPS3392Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA NO. 974/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI NIRBHAY SINGH S/O BHUPINDER SINGH VILL: LAKHNAUR, THE: KHARAR, MOHALI THE ITO WARD 6(4), MOHALI PAN NO: EKJPS5540E APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SMT. KOMAL THAKUR, ADVOCATE #!' REVENUE BY : SMT. GEETINDER MANN, (JCIT DR) $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 21/01/2020 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/01/2020 ')/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THESE THREE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS EACH DT. 26/04/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGAR H. 2 2. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE COMMON AND THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER SO THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 3. GROUNDS RAISED IN ITA NO. 972/CHD/2019 READ AS UNDER : 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH HAS WRONGLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT TREATING THE LAND AS CAPITAL ASSETS FOR THE IMPOSITION OF CAPITAL GAIN TAX ON AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH IS O UTSIDE THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS AND IS USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES. THE TAX IMPOSED MAY KINDLY B E DELETED. 2. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH HAS WRONGLY ALLOWED TO APPLY THE RATE OF AGRICULTURE LAND AS ON 01.04.1981 WHEN THE APPELLANT HAS NOT OWNED LAND. THE LAND WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE APPELLA NT IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1996-97 BY THE ORDER OF THE COURT AND THE RATE FOR ACQUISITION OF LAND MAY BE APPLIED WHEN THE LAND WAS ACQUIRED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS NOT ALLOWED THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION U/S 54B OF RS. 18,50,000/- FOR THE PURCHA SE OF LAND FROM THE AMOUNT OF SALE PROCEED RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. THE DEDUCTION OF RS. 18,50,000/- MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED. 4. ANY OTHER GROUND OF APPEAL WHICH MAY BE TAKEN BE FORE THE HEARING OF APPEAL WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE, HON'BLE INCOME TAX AP PELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH. IN OTHER APPEALS SIMILAR GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE AMOUNT INVOLVED. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IN ALL THESE AP PEALS IS SQUARELY COVERED VIDE ORDER DT. 16/01/2020 OF THE ITAT CHANDIGARH A BENCH AND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED SIMILAR ORDERS IF EVEN DATE IN RESPECT OF ALL THE ASS ESSEES INCLUDING THOSE WHO EARLIER FILED THE APPEALS BEFORE THE ITAT IN ITA NO. 967 TO 971/CHD/ 2019 IN THE CASES OF SHRI DARSHAN SINGH & OTHERS VS. ITO, W-6(4), MOHALI AND THE SAME WAS DISPOSED OFF VIDE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER DT. 16/01/2020. 5. LD. SR. DR IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ALTHOUGH SUPPORTE D THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIE S AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAVING SIMILAR FACTS HAS ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE ITAT, CHANDIGARH A BENCH VIDE ORDER DT. 3 16/01/2020 IN ITA NO. 967 TO 971/CHD/2019 IN THE CASES OF SHRI DARSHAN SINGH & OTHERS VS. ITO, W-6(4), MOHALI AND THE RELEVANT FINDINGS HAVE BE EN GIVEN IN PARA 8 WHICH READ AS UNDER: 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSE TO THE LD. CIT(A) UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. THOSE EVIDENCES WERE FORWARDED TO THE A.O. BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR HI S COMMENTS. HOWEVER, THE A.O. REQUESTED NOT TO ADMIT THOSE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES B UT HAD NOT GIVEN THE REASONS FOR THE SAME AND EVEN HE HAD NOT COMMENTED ON THE MERITS OF THE EVIDENCES WHICH WERE ADMITTED BY THE LD. CIT(A). IN OUR OPINION THIS MAT TER REQUIRES FRESH ADJUDICATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHICH WERE IN THE FORM OF OR DER OF CIVIL JUDGE, KHARAR FOR POSSESSION OF LAND AND PHOTO COPY OF RATE OF LAND PREVAILING I N THE VILLAGE WHERE THE LAND WAS SITUATED AND THE EVIDENCE OF CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE ALONGWITH AMOUNT SPENT ON THE VALUATION OF APPROVED VALUER. THOSE EVIDENCES GO TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER. ACCORDINGLY THE ISSUE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO BE ADJUDICATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD TO THE ASSESSEE. SO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO O RDER THE CASE OF PRESENT ASSESSEES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO BE ADJUDICATED AS DIRECTED IN THE SAID ORDER DT. 16/01/2020. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/01/2020) SD/- SD/- #$ % .., (SANJAY GARG ) ( N.K. SAI NI) & '(/ JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 21/01/2020 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE