ROHIT BAJORIA,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 62(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1568/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Rohit Bajoria against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which pertained to the disallowance of a claim under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2019-20. The Income Tax Department had initially disallowed the claim through an intimation under section 143(1), which was contested by Bajoria. The CIT(A) had restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for valuation by the DVO concerning the claim of variation between the stamp authority's valuation and the actual consideration. However, the tribunal found that since no claim under section 54 was made in the return, the subsequent adjustments and disallowances were not permissible under section 143(1)(a).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471005 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMULDEEP KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: DEV KUMAR KOTHARI
• Section: 250; 143(1); 54

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1568/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Rohit Bajoria 21, Bajoria Niwas, Chakraberia Lane, Paddo Pukur, Kolkata-700020. (PAN: AEHPB2249F) Vs ITO, Ward-62(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Dev Kumar Kothari, FCA Respondent by : Smt. Amuldeep Kaur, JCIT Date of Hearing : 24.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.03.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : The captioned appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Bengaluru [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1065159558(1) dated 27.05.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2019-20. 2. Smt. Amuldeep Kaur, JCIT appeared on behalf of the Respondent and Shri Dev Kumar Kothari, FCA appeared on behalf of the assessee. 3. It is submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee had filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year on 30.08.2019. It was the submission that the CPC issued a show cause notice asking the assessee 2 ITA No.1568/Kol/2024 Rohit Bajoria, AY: 2019-20 why his claim u/s. 54 is not liable to be disallowed. The assessee had responded giving detailed explanation. However, the assessee did not say that he had not made a claim u/s. 54 of the Act. The CPC subsequently issued intimation u/s. 143(1) disallowing the alleged claim u/s. 54 of the Act. It was the submission that on appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) restored the issue to the Assessing Officer directing valuation by the DVO in respect of the claim of variation of stamp authority valuation and the actual consideration. It was the submission that when there is no claim u/s. 54 such an adjustment is not permissible. 4. In reply, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer and that the assessee could make the necessary submission before the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. An intimation is issued in respect of a return filed by the assessee. Such intimation is to make adjustment in regard to certain specific issues which are provided in the provisions of section 143(1)(a). The assessee had admittedly not made a claim u/s. 54 of the Act in the return filed by him. Since the assessee has not made the claim u/s. 54, hence it no more lies in the realm of the 143(1)(a) to enter into any issue which has not been claimed by the assessee and for making any disallowance. As there is no claim u./s. 54 of the Act in the return filed by the assessee, the disallowance made in the intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) in respect of the valuation itself is inadmissible. This being so, the addition as made in the intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) and ad decided by the Ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 24th March, 2025 3 ITA No.1568/Kol/2024 Rohit Bajoria, AY: 2019-20 Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Rohit Bajoria. 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward-62(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A), Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Bengaluru 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata "