NARINJAN SINGH BAJAJ, v. ITO WD 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

MA 230/MUM/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 23019924 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AACPB2018B
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number MA 230/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant NARINJAN SINGH BAJAJ,
Respondent ITO WD 4(1)(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 20-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted H
Tribunal Order Date 20-08-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 05-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH H MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (AM) AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAG HAVAN (JM) M.A. NO. 230/MUM/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2040/MUM/2006) ASSESSMENT YEAR-2004-05 SHRI NIRANJAN SINGH BAJAJ C/O SHRI HARI RAHEJA 207 NEELKANTH 98 MARINE DRIVE MUMBAI-400 002 PAN-AACPB 2018B VS. THE ITO WARD 4(1)(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI-400 020 (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY: SHRI H.S. RAHEJA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI KESHAV SAXENA O R D E R PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSES SEE AS UNDER;- THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 27 TH JANUARY 2010 RECEIVED ON 6 TH FEBRUARY 2010 HOWEVER ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE DE PARTMENT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DIFFERENCE IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN APPEAL AND THE ARGUMENTS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DIFFERENCE IN THE FACTS OF THE APPLICANTS CASE AND THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PURCHAS ER NAMED IN THE PURCHASED DEED HOLDING AS UNDER:- EVENTHOUGH THE DECISION OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT W AS RENDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF SECTION 54F WE FIND THA T THE WORDING OF SECTION 54 IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF SECTION 54F AND HE NCE THE RATIO OF THIS DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT WILL SQUARELY APPLY TO SECTION 54 ALSO. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE MAIN DI FFERENCES POINTED OUT THAT IN THE DECISION OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE NEW FLAT SOLELY IN THE NAME OF HIS AD OPTED SON TO THE ENTIRE M.A. NO.230 /M/10 2 EXCLUSION OF HIMSELF THUS IN CLEARLY WITH THE INTEN TION OF TRANSFERRING THE PROPERTY. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO NOT MENTIONED THAT FA CT THAT ENTIRE INVESTMENT WAS MADE BY THE APPLICANT ALONE. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO NOT MENTIONED THE FAC T THAT THE APPLICANT WAS THEN FIRST OWNER AND HAT CLAUSE 10 OF THE PURCH ASE DOCUMENT CLEARLY STATED THAT THE SON AND DAUGHTER- IN-LAW HAD NOT CO NTRIBUTED TO THE PURCHASED AND THAT THEY WERE IN NAME ONLY. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS FURTHER NOT MENTIONED ABOU T THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE WIFE SON AND DAUGHTER IN LAW STATI NG THAT THEY HAD NOT MADE ANY INVESTMENT AND THAT THEY WERE IN NAME ONLY AND FURTHER THAT THE APPLICANT WAS FREE TO SELL THE FLAT WHENEVER HE DESIRED AND HE WAS HOLDING A POWER OF ATTORNEY. 2. BASED ON THE SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCES THE TRIBU NAL WAS NOT CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SATISFACTORILY PROVED HE WAS THE SOLE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND THE OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT BEEN GRANTED ANY INTEREST IN THE SAID PROPERTY. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE RATIO OF THE DE CISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT REPORTED IN 173 TAXMAN 311 WAS ADOPTED IN DEC IDING THE ISSUE. HENCE THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THE PRESENT M.A WOULD AMOUNT TO REVIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL AND HENCE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. THEREFOR E WE DISMISS THE M.A. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 20 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2010 SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL ) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED 20 TH AUGUST 2010 RJ M.A. NO.230 /M/10 3 COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR H BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T MUMBAI M.A. NO.230 /M/10 4 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: 2.8.2010 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR: 3.8.2010 ______ SR. PS/PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: _________ ______ 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: _________ ______