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
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 18.12.2018 passed in case No. CIT(A), Ranchi/10024/2017-18, involving proceedings u/s 143(3) the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex parte. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits.
With the able assistance of learned senior departmental representative, we notice at the outset that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate order under challenge has declined to condone the delay of eighty days’ delay in filing stated to be Smt. Archana Chowdhury Vs. DCIT Cir-1, Ranchi Page 2 attributable serious illness and other medical reasons. Hon'ble apex court’s landmark judgment COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. Mst. KATIJI (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) held long back that all of technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice. We therefore are of the view that the assessee’s delay of eighty days’ in filing the lower appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate but on account of the foregoing medical illness only. The same is condoned.
We now advert to merits. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance seeks to reverse both the lower authorities’ action making u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) addition of ₹43,99,000/- based on difference between the actual sale consideration of stamp valuation. Learned departmental representative fails to dispute that neither of the lower authorities had made sec. 50C(2) reference to the DVO for ascertaining fair market value of the corresponding asset as it is applicable mutatis mutandis in sec.56(2)(vii)(b)(c) Proviso to this effect. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court’s decision in Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2014) 372 ITR 83 (Cal) holds that such a reference is very much mandatory even if the taxpayer’s concerned does not raise an objection before the Assessing Officer. We adopt the very reasoning herein as well and restore the instant issue Assessing Officer for afresh adjudication as per law.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in open court at the close of hearing on Wednesday, 15th July, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (लेखा सद"य) ($या%यक सद"य) (Dr. A.L. Saini) (S.S.Godara) (Accountant Member) (Judicial Member)