OM PRAKASH LAL,RANCHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), RANCHI, RANCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 47/RAN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 June 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition was uncalled for as the amount represented assets declared under the VDIS scheme, and its inclusion in books since 1997 was irrelevant. The issue of interest under sections 234B and 234C was restored to the AO for re-computation.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared an asset of Rs. 9,41,700/- under the VDIS Scheme, 1997. The AO made an addition on the grounds that the asset was not brought forward in the books since 1997 and the documents were not authentic. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of an asset declared under VDIS, 1997, is valid if not reflected in the books of account since that year. Whether interest under sections 234B and 234C should be computed on returned or assessed income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: RANCHI

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

28.02.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क� �त�थ Date of Pronouncement / 06.06.2023 आदेश उ�घोषणा क� �त�थ For the Appellant / Shri Hari Patel, A.R �नधा#$रती क� ओर से For the Respondent / Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. D.R राज(व क� ओर से ORDER/ आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] dated 14.07.2021 for the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

Issue challenged ground nos. 1,2 and 3 is against the confirmation of addition of Rs. 9,41,700/- by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of capital gain which which was offered in VDIS, 1997 and was also accepted by the Deptt.

3.

After hearing rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly the assessee has gone into VDIS Scheme, 1997. We find that the assessee is running a very small hotel and the balance sheets prepared and furnished for various assessment years namely . AY 2000-01, 2007-08, 2012-13 and 2013-14, the assessee has disclosed the addition to assets on account of under VDIS Scheme,

Om Prakash Lal 1997 Rs. 9,41,700/-. However the AO added the same to the income of the assessee on the ground that documents furnished by the Ld. A.R revealed that though the income was offered under VDIS scheme, but the assessee has not brought forward this asset since 1997 and on this basis addition was duly made. Similarly the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed this in the appellate order for the reasons that the documents which furnished by the assessee were not authentic. After analyzing the facts on record we are of the view that the addition as sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is uncalled for and unreasonable as the said amount represented assets declared under VDIS scheme and it is of no consequence whether it was included in the books of account since 1997 or not. Accordingly we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition.

4.

Issue raised in ground no. 4 is against the charging of interest u/s 234B and C of the Act.

5.

Facts in brief are that the interest u/s 234B and C has been charged on the basis of returned income and not on assessed income by the assesse whereas according to the AO it should be charged on the basis of assessed income. We find that the issue needs to be examined at the level of AO. We restore the issue back to the file of AO to compute the interest u/s 234B & C. accordingly ground no. 4 is allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 6th June, 2023

More judgments on Section 234B

All 10,214 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →