Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH “E” Court at KOLKATA
Before: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini
आदेश /O R D E R PER BENCH (Oral):- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ranchi’s order dated 26.06.2018, passed in case No. CIT(A), Ranchi/10488/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
We notice during the course of hearing that the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant lis seeks to reverse both the lower Gupta Chemical Inds. Vs. DCIT Cir-1, Ran Page 2 authorities’ action invoking sec. 50C addition of ₹20.33 lakhs in the course of assessment and upheld in the lower appellate proceedings. Suffice to say, case file and more particularly the CIT(A)’s lower appellate order in para-5.8 indicate that the assessee / vendor had entered into the corresponding agreement to sell on 18.10.2007, received cheque payment of ₹12 lakh at that time and executed the sale deed on 21.09.2013 i.e. in the relevant previous year. This made both the lower authorities to invoke sec. 50C of the Act.
The issue that requires our apt adjudication in the instant lis as per the above facts is that of application first and second proviso to sec. 50C(1) of the Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 accepting the sale consideration going by the agreement value in the case the fuller part amount; as the case may be, been received by the approved mode(s). The CIT(A) is of the opinions that the said proviso carriage prospective effect only. Mr.Mohanti also reiterates the same reasoning that the above stated proviso does not apply with retrospective effect. We find no merit in the instant argument since this tribunal’s co-ordinate bench decision in Dharamshibhai Sonani v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2016) 161 ITD 627 (Ahd) has already held that foregoing twin provision(s) are in the matter of an attempt by the legislature to mitigate hardships and therefore carries retrospective effect only . We adopt the same reasoning mutatis mutandis and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned addition.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in open court at the close of hearing on Tuesday 21st July, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (लेखा सद"य) ($या%यक सद"य) (Dr. A.L. Saini) (S.S.Godara) (Accountant Member) (Judicial Member) *Dkp Sr.P.S. &दनांकः- 21/07/2020 कोलकाता । Gupta Chemical Inds. Vs. DCIT Cir-1, Ran Page 3