RENU DEVI MODI, Jaipur v. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 962/JPR/2012 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2015 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 96223114 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAUPM4484C
Bench Jaipur
Appeal Number ITA 962/JPR/2012
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant RENU DEVI MODI, Jaipur
Respondent ACIT, Jaipur
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-04-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 30-04-2015
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 31-12-2012
Judgment Text
VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 962/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI A-49 SHANTI PATH TILAK NAGAR JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AAUPM 4484 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.G. MUNDRA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI RAJESH OJHA JCIT -DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/03/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/04/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-CENTRAL JAIPUR DATED 2-11-2012 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2009-10 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS . 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN LA W IN CONFORMING THE FINDING RECORDED BY THE AO THAT THE AGRICULTURAL LAND SOLD BY THE APPELLANT IS SITUATED WITHIN 8 KM OF MUNICIPAL LIMIT OF SRIGANGANAGAR AND IS THERE FORE A ITA NO.962/JP/2012 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI VS. ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR . 2 CAPITAL ASSET WITHIN MEANING OF SECTION 2(14) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IS FURTHER WRONG AND HAS ERR ED IN LAW IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 4545200/- MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT BY THE AO BY ADOPTING SALE VALUE OF RS. 5595200/- U/S 50C OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 AS SHO RT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF IMPUGNED AGRICULTURAL LAND. 2.1 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE S OLD THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AT VILLAGE CHAK TEHSIL SRIGANGANAGAR WHICH IS REGULARLY CULTIVATED AND IT IS CLAIMED TO BE BEYOND 8 KM FROM SRIGANGNAG AR MUNICIPAL LIMIT. THE ASSESSEE FILED A CERTIFICATE FROM HALKA PATWARI CERTIFYING THAT THE SAID AGRICULTURAL LAND OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SITUATED BEYO ND 8 KM OF MUNICIPAL LIMITS. THE AO HELD THAT LAND WAS SITUATE WITHIN 8 KMS. OF MUNICIPAL LIMITS AND REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR E XEMPTION OF CAPITAL GAINS HOLDING THE LAND TO BE A CAPITAL ASSETS AND C ONSEQUENTLY WORKED OUT THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 45 35 200/-. 2.2 AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL WHERE THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO BY DISMISSING THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.3 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF EXE MPTION U/S 2(14) THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH NECESSARY EVIDENCE RE GARDING DISTANCE OF THE LAND FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT. THE ASSESSEE FIL ED ANSHIK NAKAL ITA NO.962/JP/2012 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI VS. ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR . 3 NAKSHA ISSUED BY PATWARI OF THE AREA DATED 28-11- 2011 INDICATING THAT THE LAND WAS SITUATED 11 KMS AWAY FROM SRIGANGANAGA R. THE ASSESSEE FILED ANOTHER NAKAL NAKSHA OF THE SAME PATWARI DATE D 12-12-2012 STATING THAT LAND WAS SITUATED APPROXIMATELY 9 KMS FROM OUT ER LIMIT OF MUNICIPALITY OF SRIGANGANAGAR ( 4ML BY PASS ROAD). THE REPORT OF THE PATWARI WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ENDORSED BY THE TEHSILDAR OF THE SRIGANGANAGAR VIDE LETTER DATED 14-12-2011. AO REQUESTED FOR NECE SSARY INQUIRIES TO ACIT CIRCLE- SRIGANGANGAR WHO IN TURN DEPUTED AN IN SPECTOR IN THIS BEHALF. THE INSPECTOR REPORTED THAT THE ALLEGED LAN D WAS JUST 7 KMS AWAY FROM ONE RESIDENTIAL COLONY NAMELY HOME LAND CITY APPROVED BY UIT SRIGANGANAGAR. CONSEQUENTLY IT WAS REPORTED THAT T HE LAND IN QUESTION WAS FOUND TO BE WITHIN 8 KMS OF MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SRIGANGANAGAR. 2.4 THE AO ACCORDINGLY REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO SH OW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 2(14) MAY NOT BE REJECT ED AND SALE CONSIDERATION MAY BE TAXED U/S 50C OF I.T. ACT AS S HORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. IN RESPONSE TO SUCH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT AS PER REVENUE RECORD SUBMITTED BY HIM THE AGRICULTURAL LA ND WAS SITUATED AT A DISTANCE OF MORE THAN 8 KMS FROM SRIGANGANAGAR PARI SHAD (MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE). IN SUPPORT THEREOF ASSESSEE RELIED ON C ERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY I.E. JURISDICTIONAL PATWARI A ND TEHSILDAWR. IT WAS ITA NO.962/JP/2012 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI VS. ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR . 4 CONTENDED THAT THESE GOVT. REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE COMPETENT TO CERTIFY DISTANCE OF THE LAND. AS REGARDS THE INSPECTORS RE PORT IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE AS TO ON WHAT BASIS AND EVIDENCE SUCH REPORT HAS BEEN FURNISHED. THE AO HELD THAT THE HOME LAND CITY WAS SITUATED ON THE SURATGARH ROAD AND AREA OF THE MUNICIPALITY EXTENDED UP TO THIS COLONY AND WHEN THE DISTANCE OF THE DISPUTED IS MEA SURED FROM THIS COLONY AND THE LAND WAS WITHIN 8 KMS OF MUNICIPAL LIMITS. IT WAS HELD THAT THE LAND WAS SITUATED WITHIN 8 KMS OF MUNICIPA L LIMITS AND BROUGHT THE CAPITAL GAINS TO TAX DENYING ASSESSEES CLAIM F OR EXEMPTION. 2.5 AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL WHERE THE ORDER OF LD. AO WAS CONFIRMED DISMISSING THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED ASSE SSEE IS NOW BEFORE US. 2.6 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT LD. AOS CONCLUSION IS BASED ON REPORT FROM THE INSPECTOR OF ACIT - SRIGAN GANAGAR WHICH ITSELF IS CONFUSING AND NON CONFIRMATORY. REPORT ONLY MENT IONS THAT LAND IS ABOUT 7 KMS FROM HOME LAND CITY WHICH IS APPROVED BY URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST. WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST AUTHORITIES LIMITS EXTEND EVEN BEYOND THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS IT HAS BEEN ERRONEOUSLY HELD THAT THE LAND IS SITUATED WITHIN 8 KMS OF MUNICIPAL LIMIT OF SRIGANGANAGAR. THUS THE RELIABLE REVENUE RECORD FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.962/JP/2012 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI VS. ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR . 5 HAS BEEN IGNORED AND INSPECTOR REPORT WHICH IS BASE D ON PRESUMPTION HAS BEEN RELIED UPON. THIS HAS RESULTED IN ARRIVING AT A FAULTY CONSIDERATION. REVENUE RECORD BEING AUTHENTIC RECORD IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.7 THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 2.8 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT APPEARS THAT REVENUE RECORD FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN APPRECIATED PROPERLY. THE INSPECTORS REPORT WHICH IS NOT BASED ON ANY REVENUE RECORD AND RELIES ONLY ON DIST ANCE FROM THE SAID HOME LAND CITY. IT IS CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE TO BE O UTSIDE THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT O F SRIGANGANAGAR NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED AND MEASURED AS PER REVENUE RECORDS. THUS IN ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THA T THE ISSUE SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE S AME AFRESH KEEPING IN VIEW OUR OBSERVATION; AFTER CONSIDERING THE MATERIA LS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STAT ISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.962/JP/2012 SMT. RENU DEVI MODI VS. ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR . 6 3.0 IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/04/201 5. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 30 TH APRIL 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SMT. RENU DEVI MODI JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A) JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT JAIPUR 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR ITAT JAIPUR 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.962/JP/2012) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR