Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi

Kuldeep Bishnoi, New Delhi vs Acit, Circle-33(1), New Delhi on 3 May, 2018

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
              DELHI BENCH 'D' NEW DELHI

    BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON'BLE PRESIDENT
                        AND
    SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                    ITA No. 1194/Del/2018
                   Assessment Year: 2014-15

                     Stay No. 328/Del/2018
                  (In ITA No. 1194/Del/2018)
                   Assessment Year: 2014-15

   Mr. Kuldeep Bishnoi,            Asstt.Commissioner of
   3, Jacarnada Avenue,            Income Tax, Circle 33(1),
                              vs
   Westend Green, Rajokari,        New Delhi.
   New Delhi-110038
   (Appellant)                     (Respondent)



                     Appellant by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate
                   Respondent by : Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR

                     Date of Hearing:   26.04.2018
            Date of Pronouncement:      03.05.2018

                              ORDER

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A)-11, New Delhi for assessment year 2014- 15 whereas the stay application seeks stay of demand of Rs. 6,18,76,610/- for the same year.

Stay No. 328/D/2018 Assessment year 2014-15

2. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee seeks permission to file additional evidences because these additional evidences go to the very root of the matter. Ld. AR submitted that during the year under appeal, the assessee had sold certain lands vide sale deed dated 6.5.2013 to M/s SKA Estates Pvt. Ltd. for Rs. 53,55,00,000/- and after deducting the cost of acquisition, long term capital gain was computed at Rs. 51,84,69,028/-. It was submitted that the assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 27,00,00,000/- u/s 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on purchase of agricultural land through Aranya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. It was submitted before the Assessing Officer by the assessee that the assessee being busy in his political activities was unable to directly purchase land and, therefore, the amount of Rs. 27,00,00,000/- was paid to M/s Aranya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. for acquiring agricultural land for and on behalf of the assessee and this amount was claimed as deduction u/s 54B of the Act in the return of income filed. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee and he proceeded to deny the claim of deduction. It was further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) also upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, 2 ITA No. 1194/D/2018 Stay No. 328/D/2018 Assessment year 2014-15 the assessee sought professional advice and he had been advised to place certain other vital documents also in support of his claim u/s 54B and, accordingly, the assessee has moved this application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules and prays for admission of additional evidences which are as under:-

i) Letter dated 4.8.2014 from M/s Gopal Hitech Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd.

ii) Letter dated 6.8.2014 from M/s Aranya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

iii) Tripartite agreement dated 20.05.2015 between the assessee, M/s Gopal Hitech Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd.

and M/s Aranya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

2.1 Ld. AR submitted that these additional evidences if admitted by the Tribunal will prove that the claim of deduction u/s 54B was a bona fide claim. As these additional evidences could not be filed before the lower authorities due to lack of proper professional advice, it was prayed that these evidences be permitted to be filed and admitted in terms of clause (b)/clause

(c) of Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules. 3 ITA No. 1194/D/2018 Stay No. 328/D/2018 Assessment year 2014-15

3. Ld. Sr. DR opposed the assessee's prayer for admitting additional evidences.

4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is undisputed that these evidences were not produced before the lower authorities. It is also undisputed that these evidences go to the very root of the matter and would assist the tax authorities to reach a proper conclusion with respect to admissibility of the assessee's claim u/s 54B of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we admit these additional evidences and we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to examine the claim of the assessee de novo after considering these additional evidences as well as after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case. Accordingly, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Since we have allowed assessee's appeal for statistical purposes and restored the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer, the stay application moved by the Assessing Officer becomes infructruous and is dismissed as such.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes whereas stay application is rejected. 4 ITA No. 1194/D/2018 Stay No. 328/D/2018 Assessment year 2014-15 This decision was pronounced in the Open Court on 3rd May, 2018.

       Sd/-                             Sd/-

(G.D. AGRAWAL)                    (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA)
   PRESIDENT                         JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 3rd May, 2018
'GS'

Copy forwarded to:

1.     Appellant
2.     Respondent
3.     CIT
4.     CIT(A)
5.     DR, ITAT
                          TRUE COPY
                                        By Order

                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR




                                  5