The Dy. CIT., Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara V. M/s. Balaji Krupa Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

ITA 986/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8680 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L P JAIN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.986/AHD/2017 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2013-14 THE DCIT, CIR.1(1)(1) BARODA. VS. M/S.BALAJI KRUPA ESTATE P.LTD. 8, SATYAM APARTMENTS 13, SAMPATRAO COLONY ALKAPURI VADODARA AABCB 9941 K / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI L.P. JAIN, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, AR ! / DATE OF HEARING : 27/06/2019 '#$ ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15/07/2019 %& / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST OR DER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-1, VADODARA DATED 3.1.2017 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2013-14. 2. SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD.CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.99,10,000/- WHICH WA S ADDED BY THE AO ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-COM PANY AT THE RELEVANT TIME WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF INVEST MENT IN REAL- ITA NO.986/AHD/2017 2 ESTATE AND RENTING OF PROPERTIES. IT HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ELECTRONICALLY ON 25.9.2013 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,18,66,20/-. ON SCRUTINY OF THE ACCOUNTS, IT R EVEALED TO THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD A PROPERTY DURING THE ACCOUNTING PERIOD FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2010-11 FOR A CONSIDERATI ON OF RS.4.11 CRORES. IT HAS CLAIMED COST OF IMPROVEMENT OF RS.1 .95 CRORES IN F.Y.2009-10. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE VARIOUS PAYMENT S AMOUNTING TO RS.50 LAKHS. THE BALANCE OF RS.1.45 C RORES HAS BEEN SHOWN AS LIABILITY TOWARDS RAMA REALITY I.E. C ONTRACTOR. THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE ASSTT. YEAR 2010-11. DISPUTE TRAVELLED UPTO THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.969 A ND 1071/AHD/2014. TRIBUNAL HELD THAT SINCE THE ASSESS EE HAS ALREADY OFFERED THIS AMOUNT FOR TAXATION IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 2013-14 ON ACCOUNT OF REMISSION/CESSATION OF LIABILITY, THEREF ORE, THIS ADDITION OF RS.99.10 LAKHS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 18 READS AS UNDER: 18. SO FAR AS THE BALANCE OF RS. 99.10 LACS IS CON CERNED, A PERUSAL OF THE PAPER BOOK SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS OFFERED THE SAME AS REMISSION/CESSATION OF LIABILIT Y IN A.Y. 2013-14 AND HAS PAID THE TAXES ACCORDINGLY. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED THIS AMOUNT AS ITS INCOME IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR IF THE DISALLOWANCE IS SUSTAINED DU RING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, IT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION OF THE SAME AMOUNT. THEREFORE, IN OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACT, THIS DISALLOWANCE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. WE, AC CORDINGLY, MODIFY THE FINDINGS OF THE ID. CIT(A) AND DIRECT TH E A.O. TO CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF RS. 45.90 LACS AND DELETE T HE ADDITION OF RS. 99.10 LACS. 4. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTS ET ADMITTED THAT ADDITION FROM ASSTT.YEAR 2010-11 OF RS.99.10 L AKHS WAS DELETED ON ACCOUNT OF THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE THA T IT OFFERED IN ITA NO.986/AHD/2017 3 2013-14. NOW THIS AMOUNT IS TAXABLE IN THIS ASSESS MENT YEAR, AND THEREFORE, ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE S ET ASIDE. THUS, ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE. AT THIS STAGE , WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO NOTE THE FINDING OF THE AO ON THIS I SSUE WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN SUB-PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. I T READS AS UNDER: A.Y. 2013-14: AS THE MATTER IS PENDING WITH THE HO NBLE ITAT-AHMEDABAD FOR ADJUDICATION, NO CHANGE IS BEING MADE IN THE CAPITAL GAIN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION (I.E. A.Y.2013-14). HOWEV ER, AS AND WHEN THE MATTER IS DECIDED BY THE HONBLE ITAT AND IS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE, THE ISSUE IN QUESTION WILL BE DISPOSED ACCORDINGLY. A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE WOULD INDICATE THAT THE LD. AO KEPT THIS ISSUE OPEN IN ORDER TO AWAIT THE DECISION OF I TAT FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2010-11. THUS, THE ISSUE IS REQUIRED TO BE ADJUDICATED NOW. WE SET ASIDE IT TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH A DJUDICATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 TH JULY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 15/07/2019 %& '() *%)$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :