CMS COMPUTERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 3(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3063/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 June 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivadh se Vishwas Scheme and filed the necessary forms. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee sold a plot of land for Rs. 1,10,00,000, but the stamp duty value was Rs. 1,85,45,000. The Assessing Officer added the difference of Rs. 75,45,000 under Section 50C, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the addition made under Section 50C due to the difference between the sale consideration and the stamp duty value. The assessee's subsequent opting for the Vivadh se Vishwas Scheme became the deciding factor for the appeal's disposal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI & SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

For Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr AR
Hearing: 21/06/2022Pronounced: 28/06

ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal (JM):

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee as against the order of Ld.CIT(A)-51, Mumbai dated 11/03/2019 under section 250 of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2015-16.

2.

The issue pertaining to this appeal is the addition of Rs.75,45,000/- under section 50C made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A).

3.

Briefly stated, the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in biometric attendance and access control system, security surveillance system, job wok, e-governance, etc. The assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2015 declaring total income of Rs.10,60,68,770/- under various heads such as “Income from business and profession”, “Income from capital gains”

ITA 3063/MUM/2019 and “Income from other sources”. The return of income was subsequently revised on 31/03/2016 declaring same income as that declared in the original return of income. The assessee’s case was selected for limited scrutiny assessment where the Assessing Officer has stated that the assessee has sold a plot of land bearing Plot No.W-324 alongwith structure allotted by MIDC in TTC Industrial Area for consideration of Rs.1,10,00,000/- on 12/12/2014 for the impugned assessment which was reflected in the audited accounts. The Assessing Officer alleges that stamp duty value of the said property was Rs.1,85,45,000/-. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the assessee’s submission that there was a time gap of 5 years between the date of MOU in which the assessee was said to have received Rs.30 lakhs and the balance during the time of registration of agreement on 12/12/2014, made the addition of Rs.75,45,000/- under section 50C being the difference between the stamp duty valuation and the agreement value. The Assessing Officer further stated that the Proviso to section 50C was not applicable to the assessee’s case for the impugned assessment year as it was with effect from 01/04/2017. The Assessing Officer further stated that the assessee had not produced any proof to substantiate the assessee’s claim that it had received the amount of Rs.30 lakhs on 13/05/2010. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who confirmed the addition.

4.

The assessee is in appeal before us as against the orders of the lower authorities. During the appellate proceedings, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has opted for ‘Vivadh se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ to settle the disputed in the impugned assessment year and has stated that Forms 1 & 2 were filed on 31/01/2021. The Ld.AR citing the above reason

ITA 3063/MUM/2019 stated that the appeal may be permitted to be withdrawn with liberty given to the assessee to recall the order. 5. The Ld.DR had nothing to controvert the same. 6. From the above observation, we direct that the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. However, the assessee is at liberty to move this Tribunal for recall of this order, if at a later stage the need arises. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th June, 2022.

More judgments on Section 50C

All 3,223 judgments and leading authorities on Section 50C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →