Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arose against an order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal primarily concerned issues related to the validity of reassessment proceedings, the addition on account of section 50C, and the failure to consider the DVO's valuation report.
Held
The Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's ground regarding the validity of section 148/147 proceedings, rejecting it. However, regarding the section 50C addition, the Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer proceeded without obtaining or considering the DVO's valuation report due to time-barring concerns.
Key Issues
Whether the reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 were valid and whether the addition made under section 50C without considering the DVO's report was justified.
Sections Cited
11(2), 11(6), 143(3), 148, 147, 50C, 55A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.2116/M/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18
M/s. Ghelani Charitable ITO (Exmp) 1(3), Trust, CIT(Exmp), 6th Floor, 388/394 Sheikh Memon Telephone Exchange Street, Vs. Building, Fort, Cumbala Hill, Mumbai – 400 002 Pedder Road, Maharashtra Mumbai – 400 026 PAN: AAATG2341Q (Appellant) (Respondent)
Present for: Assessee by : Shri Sanjay Parikh, A.R. Revenue by : Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R.
Date of Hearing : 18 . 07 . 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 24 . 07 . 2024
O R D E R Per : Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18
arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC)
Delhi’s DIN & order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-
24/1063607297(1) dated 29.03.2024, in proceedings under
section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
2 ITA No.2116/M/2024 M/s. Ghelani Charitable Trust 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in
the instant appeal:
“1. The Ld. AO erred in not allowing valid accumulation u/s. 11(2).
There cannot be double taxation on the same income accumulated u/s. 11(2). The unspent amount is offered to tax in Α. Υ. 2022-23.
The Ld. AO failed to consider the request for allowing the time for submission of small balance direction letters for corpus donations.
The Ld. AO erred in not allowing depreciation u/s. 11(6).
The Ld. AO erred in adding interest on income tax refund which was not received.
The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing submission within the allowed time and depriving the appellant submission trust for and dismissed the appeal which is bad in law because it is breach of principles of natural justice.”
We have given our thoughtful considerations to
assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s vehement contentions.
3 ITA No.2116/M/2024 M/s. Ghelani Charitable Trust Coming to the first and foremost issue of validity of section
148/147 proceedings itself, learned counsel could hardly
dispute that the Assessing Officer’s corresponding reasons
reproduced in para 3 of the assessment order dated
27.12.2018 had indeed taken note of not only the difference
between actual sale price and stamp price of the corresponding
capital asset giving rise to long term capital gains but also the
learned counsel was fair enough that the same had been
wrongly declared/disclosed as short term capital gains as
against the correct factual position. We thus see no merit in
the assessee’s instant first and foremost legal ground in very
terms once the learned Assessing Officer had recorded his
reasons based on tangible material only. It is rejected
accordingly.
Next comes the issue of section 50C addition amounting
to Rs.2,50,25,760/- made in both the lower proceedings.
There is no dispute between assessee’s actual sale price and
stamp value adopted by the State Revenue Authorities. We
note in this factual backdrop that the learned Assessing Officer
had made section “55A/50C” reference to the District
Valuation Officer “DVO” for the purpose of determining fair
4 ITA No.2116/M/2024 M/s. Ghelani Charitable Trust market value “FMV” of the assessee’s capital asset. He
admittedly framed the assessment/reassessment dated
27.12.2018 without either getting the said valuation report or
waiting for the same for the sole reason that it was “time
barring assessment” as per his detailed discussion in para 7.1
in question. Learned CIT(A) has also decided/dismissed the
assessee’s lower appeal challenging the impugned addition.
All the above narrated facts make it clyster clear that
both the learned lower authorities have not either received or
considered the DVO’s valuation report; as the case may be
before making the impugned section 50C addition of
Rs.2,50,35,760/-. This being the clinching fact herein, we
deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant sole
substantive grievance on merits back to the learned Assessing
Officer in very terms. We further deem it appropriate to
observe that it would indeed be appreciated if the learned
Assessing Officer concludes the consequential proceedings as
early as possible keeping in mind the fact that the assessment
herein is A.Y. 2015-16. Ordered accordingly.
5 ITA No.2116/M/2024 M/s. Ghelani Charitable Trust
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical
purposes in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24.07.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.
Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//
By Order
Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.