ROBOSSIST TECHNOLOGIES,PUNE vs. WARD 1, ITO, AHMEDNAGAR

Without prejudice to the above ground and on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessing Officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,82,09,000/-, being difference between ready reckoner value adopted for stamp duty Rs.2,37,09,000/- and actual consideration received Rs. 55,00,000/-, without appreciating the fact the said land was lease hold land therefore provisions of section 50C are not applicable and secondly without appreciating the fact that section 500 gives an option assessee to claim that actual consideration is correct. Therefore, entire additions need to be deleted Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of natural justice.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2019-20 on 29.02.2019 and the same was processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act on 06.07.2022 after making addition of Rs. 1,82,09,000/- u/s 50C of the Act. The assessee filed rectification application u/s 154 of the Act on 31.05.2023 stating that provision of section 50C are not applicable. Ld. AO allowed the assessee’s application u/s 154 stating that there was a mistake apparent from record in the order u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Subsequently Ld. AO again passed an order u/s 154 of the Act on 11.12.2024 stating that since there was no apparent mistake in the return processed u/s 143(1)(A) of the Act, therefore the previous order passed u/s 154 on 27.11.2024 is hereby reversed. Further the assessee challenged the order u/s 154 of the Act but failed to get any relief from the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal treating as infructuous. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee has already challenged the 3 order u/s 143(1)(A) before Ld. CIT(A) and the same is still pending to be disposed off. He stated that the apparent mistake has been accepted once by Ld. AO and then it has been reversed. He also submitted that addition u/s 50C of the Act cannot be made in processing of return u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. He also stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case.

On the other hand Ld. DR supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A).

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee sold lease holding land and building for a total consideration of Rs. 95,00,000/- Fair market value for the purpose of stamp duty was stated in the income tax return at Rs. 2,37,09,000/- Based on this information available in the return of income, CPC made an addition of Rs. 1,82,09,000/- in the return processed u/s 143(1)(A) dated 06.07.2020. This order u/s 143(1)(a) addition in the hands of assessee u/s 50C of the Act has been challenged by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) but the appeal is still pending to be disposed off. Subsequently assessee filed an application u/s 154 of the Act stating that CPC made an apparent mistake making impugned addition and the assessee succeeded but after some time Ld. AO passed another order u/s 154 of the Act reversing the previous order. Ld. CIT(A) in the 4 impugned order has not dealt on merits but has observed that as there was no apparent mistake in the return processed u/s 143(1)(A) of the Act no order u/s 154 of the Act was required to be passed and Ld. CIT(A) thus held assessee’s appeal as infructuous.

We further observed that the date of the order appealed against is 27.10.2023 but u/s 154 of the Act mentioned in Form 35 filed before Ld. CIT(A) is different to the date of order passed u/s 154 of the Act on 11.12.2024 and the copy of which is placed on record. We also note that Ld. AO has allowed the assessee’s application u/s 154 stating that there is an apparent mistake in the assessment order framed u/s 143(1)(a) but it was subsequently reversed by Ld. AO. Under these given facts and circumstances we find that there is an apparent mistake as appellant mistake has been admitted by Ld. AO. Therefore Ld. CIT(A) ought to have dealt with the merits of the case relating to addition u/s 50C of the Act. Since the order for appeal against order u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act is pending before the first appellate authority, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue raised on merits in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A). Assessee is also directed to correct the contents of Form 35 and also to file necessary details in support of its grounds of appeal raised on merits and the same shall be decided by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC by passing a speaking order in accordance with law after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the 5 assessee. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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