SRI. RANGANATH MANGAL VEDKAR,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2613/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 April 2018AY 2006-072 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue authorities should have examined the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 54, even if it was not made in the original return. The matter was set aside and remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual who owned land in Bangalore, entered into a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) for construction. The Revenue authorities did not examine the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

The key issues were the validity of initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 54.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.A
For Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT

PER SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 8/8/2017 of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 5, Bengaluru relating to asst. year 2006-07.

2.

The assessee is an individual. He owned land in Bangalore. He entered into a registered Joint Development Agreement (JDA) dated 24/6/2005 for development by construction over the land owned by the Assessee. As per the JDA, the assessee was

10.

As far as deductions u/s 54 of the Act is concerned, the Revenue authorities have not examined the claim of the assessee at all. The fact that there is no claim made in the return of income for such deduction cannot be the basis not to examine a lawful claim made by the assessee which if it is accordance with the provisions of law, should be allowed. Since this issue also needs to be examined by the AO, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remand the issues with regard to validity of initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 54 of the Act, to the AO for fresh consideration. The AO will afford opportunity of being heard to the assessee before deciding the issues. For statistical purposes the appeal is treated as allowed.

11.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th April, 2018.

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →