PRATAP RAJASTHAN SPECIAL STEELS,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 58/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 February 2018AY 2006-073 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the outcome of the pending appeal before the CIT(A) concerning the original assessment order was relevant to the present appeal. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147, alleging that long-term capital gains on the sale of factory land and building had escaped taxation. The assessee's appeal against the original assessment order concerning the same transaction was pending.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were valid when the original assessment order concerning the same transaction was under appeal. The applicability of Section 50C was also a point of contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 148,Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 58/JP/2018

Hearing: 05/03/2018Pronounced: 08/03/2018

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 58/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s Pratap Rajasthan cuke ACIT, Vs. Special Steel Ltd., Road No.- Circle-04 06, VKI Area, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAECP0508M vihykFkhZ@Assessee izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Manish Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shanmuga Priya(JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 05/03/2018 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 08/03/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex-parte order of ld. CIT (A)-2, Jaipur dated 07.11.2017 in respect of order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 read with section 143(3) and section 144 of the Act.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessment determining the total income of Rs. 6,67,06,680/-of the assessee was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, it came to notice of the Assessing Officer that the assessee has sold certain factory land and building for Rs. 5,00,40,330/- and sales consideration has been adopted by Registering authority at Rs. 5,10,45,690/-. It was accordingly observed by the AO that long term capital gains to the extent of Rs. 23,78,809/- has escaped taxation. The proceedings u/s 147 was initiated by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act and the reassessment was thereafter completed at an income of Rs. 6,90,85,489/-.

2 ITA No. 58/JP/2018. M/s Pratap Rajasthan Special Steel Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld CIT(A) who has confirmed the said disallowance holding that the provisions of section 50C are clearly applicable and no details have been furnished by the assessee. Against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

4.

During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the appeal against the original order passed u/s 143(3) is currently pending adjudication before the ld. CIT(A). The ld AR further submitted that the outcome of the said appeal proceedings has a bearing on the subject appeal as capital gains arising on the sale of the same factory land and building was brought to tax in the original assessment order passed u/s 143(3) and under the same sale agreement, an amount of Rs. 23,78,890/- was brought to tax under the impunged proceeding. It was submitted that the said fact was also brought to the notice of the ld CIT(A) however it seems that the same has escaped her attention. It was accordingly requested that the matter may kindly be set aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter on merit.

5.

The ld. DR is heard who has opposed the setting aside of the order to the ld. CIT(A) as sufficient opportunity has already been granted to the assessee and the assessee choose not to appear before the ld. CIT(A). She further relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.

6.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. As submitted by the ld. AR, the transaction relating to sale of the factory land and building is pending adjudication before the ld. CIT(A) and the subject appeal also arises out of the same transaction. It would therefore be relevant to know the outcome of the said proceedings arising under the original assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act before we decide the present appeal. We accordingly set-aside the matter to the file of

3 ITA No. 58/JP/2018. M/s Pratap Rajasthan Special Steel Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh. Needless to say, the assesse shall attend to the proceedings before the ld CIT(A), shall not seek any adjournment without reasonable cause and shall submit necessary information documentation as may be called for by the ld. CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/03/2018.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; ikWy jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vijay Pal Rao) (Vikram Singh Yadav) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Jaipur Dated:- 08/03/2018. Ganesh Kumar/ आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Assessee- M/s Pratap Rajasthan Special Steel Ltd., Jaipur 2. The Respondent – ACIT, Jaipur 3. The CIT. 4. The CIT (4), 5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 58/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →