2018 (3) TMI 1943 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of sale consideration of half portion of the property - whether CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in adopting the sale consideration of Vi portion of property (sold during the year) on the basis of first agreement of sale? - HELD THAT - Since no reasons have been specified in the order, the matter is being referred back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with directions to pass a speaking order on the issue. Both the Representatives of the parties have also conceded to the proposal of setting aside the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the addition of ?11,44,500 in the returned income based on property sale consideration, consideration of cancelled and revised sale agreements, consideration of purchaser's statement, rejection of second sale agreement, lack of detailed consideration of submissions filed.

Analysis:

1. Addition of ?11,44,500 by Assessing Officer:
The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition without specifying reasons after the assessee's written submission. The order mentioned that the Assessing Officer was justified in making the addition based on the sale consideration of half portion of the property at ?45,15,000. However, as the reasons were not detailed, the matter was referred back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a speaking order on the issue. Both parties agreed to setting aside the matter for further clarification.

2. Consideration of Sale Agreements:
The assessee argued that the first agreement of sale for ?90,30,000 was cancelled, and a revised agreement for ?55,00,000 was made due to property title litigation. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition based on the first agreement without considering the subsequent revised agreement. Additionally, the statement of the purchaser recorded during assessment proceedings and the rejection of the second agreement without specific reasons were not appropriately addressed by the CIT(A).

3. Detailed Submissions Consideration:
The assessee contended that detailed submissions filed during the hearing were not adequately considered by the CIT(A) in the order. The failure to address these submissions in the decision-making process raised concerns about the thoroughness and completeness of the assessment.

In conclusion, the ITAT Chandigarh allowed the appeals of the assessee for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a detailed and reasoned decision by the CIT(A) regarding the addition of ?11,44,500. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering all relevant agreements, statements, and submissions in tax assessment proceedings to ensure a fair and comprehensive evaluation of the case.