Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Raghunath Green Power (P) Ltd,, Chennai vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai on 22 February, 2018
आयकर अपील य अ
धकरण, 'बी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH : CHENNAI
ी अ ाहम पी. जॉज , लेखा सद य एवं
ी ध$ु व%
ु आर.एल रे &डी, या)यक सद य के सम+ ।
[BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER]
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2268/CHNY/2017.
नधा रण वष /Assessment year : 2005-06
M/s. Raghunath Green Power (P) Ltd, The Deputy Commissioner of
No.16, Cenotaph Road, Vs. Income Tax,
Teynampet, Corporate Circle 5(1)
Chennai 600 018. Chennai.
[PAN AADCR 1513K]
(अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent)
अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate
यथ क ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. R.U. Aroon Prasad, JCIT.
सन
ु वाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 14-02-2018
घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 22-02-2018
आदे श / O R D E R
PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
In this appeal filed by the assessee, which is directed against an order dated 30.06.2017 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, it assails the confirmation of a rectification order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ''the Act'').
:- 2 -: ITA No.2268 /2017
2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that against the original assessment which was subject to the rectificatory proceedings u/s.154 of the Act, assessee had filed an appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). As per the ld. Authorised Representative, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had dismissed such appeal and assessee had preferred further appeal before the Tribunal. Contention of the ld. Authorised Representative was that this Tribunal vide its order dated 11.09.2015 in ITA No.2307/Mds/2013restored the matter to the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for deciding it afresh. According to the ld. Authorised Representative, this was brought to the notice of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) through a letter dated 3.11.2016 when he was siezed of the appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.154 of the Act. According to him, ld. Assessing Officer had through his order u/s.154 of the Act substituted the cost of acquisition for computing long term gains/ loss, against original computation of long term capital gain made by the ld. Assessing Officer. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was still to dispose off the matter pursuant to the setting aside order of the Tribunal.
:- 3 -: ITA No.2268 /2017
3. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
4. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. Assessment was originally completed on 22.12.2011 determining capital gain of Rs.60,02,099/- against long term capital loss of Rs.25,70,937/- admitted by the assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer had substituted gross consideration with guideline value and disallowed the claim of expenditure. Assessee had moved in appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against such assessment. While this appeal was pending before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ld. Assessing Officer did a rectification u/s.154 of the Act substituting the cost of acquisition of the land with a different figure. Though this was brought to the notice of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), he went ahead and disposed off the appeal of the assessee, confirming the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. Assessee had moved further appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal had remitted the matter back to the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vide its order dated 11.09.2015 in ITA No.2307/Mds/2013. The directions of the Tribunal at para 6 of the said order is reproduced hereunder:-
''6. We have heard both sides, perused the materials on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The assessee sold a property for a consideration of :- 4 -: ITA No.2268 /2017 Rs.2,41,58,928/- and claimed expenses in connection with transfer at ₹67,87,640/-. However, the assessee has not furnished any proof for the expenses incurred and therefore, the Assessing Officer has taken the guideline value for stamp valuation purposes and worked out the sale consideration at ₹2,67,44,324/- for computation of capital gain. On appeal, even before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has not furnished any evidence for the claim of expenditure incurred by it. However, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that initially the case was heard partly before the ld. CIT(A) and the matter was adjourned for the purpose of filing evidences. It was further submitted that the notice of hearing issued by the Department has not reached the assessee since it was sent to assessee s old address and it was re-routed to the assessee and reached after the date of hearing. Therefore, the assessee was not able to produce evidences for the expenditure incurred for the sale of property and submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee for filing the evidences. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that one more opportunity shall be given to the assessee to meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the entire issue is remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to consider the evidences for the expenditure incurred, as may be filed by the assessee, and decide the issue afresh after giving required opportunity to the assessee''.
The matter now before us is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) whereby he affirmed the rectificatory order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer, substituting the cost of acquisition with a different figure for computing long term capital gains/loss. Since the issues are all related to computation of capital gains or loss arising out from the sale of very same property, we are of the opinion that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should consider both the appeals together. In other :- 5 -: ITA No.2268 /2017 words, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has to consider the original appeal of the assessee which is before him pursuant to the order dated 11.09.2015 in ITA No.2307/Mds/2013 of the Tribunal, along with the appeal filed by the assessee against the rectification order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.154 of the Act, together.
We therefore set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) and remit this appeal also back to him, for consideration afresh alongwith appeal against the original assessment which is to be adjudicated again, pursuant to direction of the Tribunal.
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced on Thursday, the 22nd day of February, 2018, at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(ध$ु व%
ु आर.एल रे &डी) (अ ाहम पी. जॉज )
(DUVVURU RL REDDY) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE)
या)यक सद य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
चे#नई/Chennai
$दनांक/Dated:22nd February, 2018.
KV
आदे श क त'ल(प अ)े(षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 3. आयकर आयु*त (अपील)/CIT(A) 5. (वभागीय त न/ध/DR
2. यथ /Respondent 4. आयकर आयु*त/CIT 6. गाड फाईल/GF