S.Pavan Kumar, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 323/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5552 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR
• Keywords: Reason to believe

Judgement Text

, ' ' , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , # $ BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 323 /MDS/201 6 ( ./I.T.A. NO. 2278/MDS/2015) #% % / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI S. PAVAN KUMAR, PLOT NO. 1838, I BLOCK, 20 TH STREET, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 040. [ PAN: AFDPR 0277C] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD XIV(3), CHENNAI. ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ( ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, CA +,( ) /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT ) /DATE OF HEARING : 03 .03.2017 ) /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03 .05. 2017 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED IN ITA NO. 227 8/MDS/2015 TO RECTIFY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18.08.2016. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE MAIN CONTENTION OF T HE LD. AR THAT THE GROUND NO. 3 WAS NOT ADJUDICATED: M.P. NO.323/MDS/2016 :- 2 -: FOR THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT HAVE ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. 3. WE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS IN THE PETITION FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE SAID GROUND IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO 2 TO 6 ON VALIDITY OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. WE ALSO CONSIDERED T HE GROUND ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE RE-ASSESSMENT AT PARA 7 PAGE 9 OF THE ORDER AND WE HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE VALIDITY OF RE-ASSESSMENT. SINCE, WE HAVE ALREADY CONSIDERED T HE GROUND AND SUBMISSIONS. IN OUR DECISION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ISS UE OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IS DEALT AND ADJUDICATED. 4. THE NEXT CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. AR THAT TH E AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS NOT DISPUTED BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL AS THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT THE LAND SOLD IS CONSIDERED AS AGRICULTURAL LAND AND RELIED ON RE-HABILITATION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS AND THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A). THE TRIBUNAL HELD ON DISPUTED ISSUE AT PARA 7 PAGE 13 AND TOOK A DECISION WHICH READ AS UNDER: SO, CONSIDERING THE APPARENT FACTS, MATERIAL EVIDE NCE, JUDICIAL DECISIONS WHETHER THESE FACTS ARE DISCLOSED BEFORE LD. AO IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED ELECTRONICALLY. WE DIRECT THE LD. AO TO VERIFY FROM THE INCOME TAX WEBSITE WHETHER THIS AMOUNT WAS DISCLOSED IN EL ECTRONIC RETURN ITR III FILED ON 30.09.2009 AND AFTER SATISFYING THE LD AO SHALL EXAMINE THE CHARACTERISTIC OF AGRICULTURAL LAND FROM THE PURCHA SER AND ALLOW THE CLAIM M.P. NO.323/MDS/2016 :- 3 -: OF THE ASSESSEE BY TREATING THE TRANSACTION AS SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE OPPORT UNITY OF HEARING BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER ON MERITS. NOW WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE DIRECTIONS OF TH E TRIBUNAL IS MODIFIED AS UNDER: WE CONSIDERING THE APPARENT FACTS, MATERIAL EVIDE NCE AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE INCOME TAX RETURN ELECTRONICALLY ON 13.09.2009. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VER IFY THE DISCLOSURES ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND IN RELATION TO RE-HABITATION AGREEMENT. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND REMIT THE DISPUTED ISSUE FOR LIMITED PURPOSE FOR EXAMINAT ION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON SALE TRANSACTION AND AGRICULTURAL LAND A ND THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE PAS SING THE ORDER ON MERITS. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 3 RD DAY OF MAY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. /CHENNAI, / /DATED: 3 RD MAY, 2017. JPV ) +#12 32 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 2. +,( /RESPONDENT 3. 4 ( )/CIT(A) 4. 4 /CIT 5. 2 +## /DR 6. % /GF SD/- ( . ) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( . ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER