SMT. JOGINDER KAUR ATWAL, KAPURTHALA V. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX - 2, JALANDHAR

WTA 02/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3312 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2019
• Assessment Year: 1994-1995
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VEDPAL SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDIP VIJH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Retrospective amendment; Set aside
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER WTA NO.1/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1993-94 WTA NO.2/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1994-95 WTA NO.3/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1995-96 SMT. JOGINDER KAUR ATWAL, C/O V.P. VIJH & CO., CA, K.K. TOWER, 1 ST & 2 ND FLOOR, JALANDHAR VS PR. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX-2, JALANDHAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAKPA9687K WTA NO.4/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1996-97 WTA NO.5/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1997-98 WTA NO.6/ASR./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1998-99 SH. HARPREET SINGH ATWAL, C/O V.P. VIJH & CO., CA, K.K. TOWER, 1 ST & 2 ND FLOOR, JALANDHAR VS PR. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX-2, JALANDHAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAKPA9686J ASSESSEE BY : SH. SANDIP VIJH, CA REVENUE BY : SH. VED PA L SINGH, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 08.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.01.2019 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDERS DATED 03.11.2016 IN THE CASE OF SMT. JOGINDER KAUR ATWAL AND 31.03.2017 IN THE CASE OF SH. HARPREET SINGH ATWAL PASSED BY THE LD. PR. CWT-2, JALANDHAR. WTA NOS. 1 TO 6/ASR./2017 JOGINDER KAUR & HARPREET SINGH ATWAL 2 2. SINCE, THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE COMMON AND THE AP PEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, SO THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 3. COMMON GROUNDS HAS BEEN RAISED IN THESE APPEALS FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE AMO UNT INVOLVED. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN WTA NO.1/ASR./2017 READS AS UNDER: 1. THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X HAS ERRED IN REFUSING TO EXERCISE REVISIONARY POWER U/S 25 TO EXCLUDE VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AT RS.34,32,000/- FROM THE RETURNED WEALTH IN VIEW OF THE RETROSPECTIVE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2(EA). 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN REGULARLY FILING HER WEALTH TAX RETURNS AFTER INCLU DING THE VALUE OF URBAN AGRICULTURAL LAND. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE F ILED REVISION APPLICATION U/S 25(1) OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 1957 B EFORE THE LD. PR. CWT CONTENDING THEREIN THAT DUE TO RETROSPECTIVE AM ENDMENT VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2013 W.E.F. 01.04.1993 TO THE DEFINITI ON OF THE TERM ASSET U/S 2(EA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AGRICU LTURAL URBAN LAND HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE DEFINITION OF ASSET FOR W EALTH TAX PURPOSES AND THAT THE TIME LIMIT FOR FILING APPLICA TION U/S 25 HAD BEEN RELAXED BY THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 11 OF 20 15 DATED 11.06.2015. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR REVISION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR REMOVING THE VALUE OF URBAN AG RICULTURAL LAND FROM THE TOTAL WEALTH ASSESSED, IN VIEW OF THE SAID AMENDMENT. THE LD. PR. CWT, HOWEVER, DID NOT FIND MERIT IN THE SUB MISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABL E TO FILE ANY WTA NOS. 1 TO 6/ASR./2017 JOGINDER KAUR & HARPREET SINGH ATWAL 3 EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HAVING FILED THE WEALTH TAX RETURN AND PAYMENT OF WEALTH TAX. 5. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE REVISION APPLICATION U/S 25(1) OF THE WEALTH TAX WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. PR. CWT-2, THE DOCUMENTS COULD NOT BE PRODU CED WHICH WERE EARLIER MISPLACED. HOWEVER, THE SAME ARE NOW AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. P R. CWT-2, JALANDHAR. IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999- 2000 TO 2012-13, THE LD. PR. CWT-2, JALANDHAR HAS ALLOWED THE RELIEF TO THE ASSE SSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 19.09.2016 (COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS FURNISHED WH ICH IS PLACED ON RECORD). 6. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. SR. DR ALTHOUG H SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. PR. CWT-2, JALANDHAR BUT C OULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CA SE, IT APPEARS THAT THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN THE FORM OF WEALTH TAX RETURNS AND THE EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT FOR WEALTH TAX WERE MISPLACED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT IT IS CLAIMED THAT NOW THOSE ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMAND THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. PR. CWT TO BE DECI DED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN WTA NOS. 2 & 3/ASR./2017 BELONGING TO THIS AS SESSEE AND IN WTA NOS. 4 TO 6/ASR./2017 BELONGING TO SH. HARPREET SIN GH ATWAL, THE FACTS ARE WTA NOS. 1 TO 6/ASR./2017 JOGINDER KAUR & HARPREET SINGH ATWAL 4 IDENTICAL. THEREFORE, OUR FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE FOR MER PART OF THIS ORDER SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10/01/2019) SD/- SD/- (RAVISH SOOD) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER V ICE PRESIDENT DATED: 10/01/2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR