JAMILA MOHMEDRAFIQ IMAM,HIMATNAGAR vs. THE ITO, S.K.WARD-4, HIMATNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 21/AHD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 March 2022AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's case is duly supported by a series of documents, including the registered deed dated 27.03.2012, details of payment received, and the mention of handing over possession to the purchaser. The Tribunal noted that while the registration might have been recorded later on 17.04.2015, this could be due to heavy workload at the year-end. Considering the sale deed, consideration paid, possession handed over, government seal, stamp duty paid, and the execution date of the sale deed as 27.03.2012, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the assessee's claim that the transaction took place in Assessment Year 2012-13 and not 2013-14. Consequently, the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act for escaping assessment in AY 2013-14 was quashed as it had no legal basis. The appeal was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jamila Mohmedrafig Imam, is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-6, Ahmedabad, which upheld the order of the ITO, Ward-4, Himmatnagar. The assessment year in question is 2013-14. The assessee sold an immovable property for Rs. 25,00,000/-. The case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the assessee had not filed a return of income. The AO added Rs. 26,27,026/- as Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Gain based on the valuation by the Assistant Valuation Officer (AVO) of Rs. 43,693/- as on 01.04.1981, contrary to the assessee's declared valuation of Rs. 3,52,100/-. The assessee challenged the reopening proceedings and the additions on merit. The core of the dispute is the date of transfer of property.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2013-14 are maintainable, considering the date of transfer of property? The assessee contended that the property was transferred on 27.03.2012, when the consideration was received and possession was handed over, thus falling within Assessment Year 2012-13. Therefore, the reopening for Assessment Year 2013-14 is void ab initio. The assessee relied on the sale deed dated 27.03.2012, payment details, and possession handover mentioned therein. The revenue contended that the property registration date, as informed by the Sub-Registrar, Ahmedabad-10, Vejalpur, was 17.04.2015, implying the transaction occurred in Assessment Year 2013-14, justifying the reopening. The revenue relied on the information from the Sub-Registrar.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 48

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, C.A
For Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, SR. DR
Hearing: 16.03.2022Pronounced: 30.03.2022

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL AT AHMEDABAD] BEFORE WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER& Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Jamila Mohmedrafiq Imam Vs. ITO, Nani Vahorvad, Marhaba Street, Sabarkantha Ward-4, Himatnagar, Gujarat Himmatnagar [PAN No.ACUPI9475K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. F. Jain, C.A. Revenue by : Shri V. K. Singh, SR. DR Date of Hearing 16.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 30.03.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 28.12.2016 passed by the ITO, S.K., Ward-4, Himmatnagar under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

The assessee has sold an immovable property amounting to Rs. 25,00,000/- by and under a sale deed registered dated 17.04.2012 with the Office of the Sub-

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →