9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 263 as the view adopted by the Assessing Officer was clearly unsustainable in law. Having said that, we must add that there can be other legal reasons for grant of relief on merits, and that area is not yet explored by, or before, us. In any case, all that the learned Commissioner has directed is examination of the claim on merits and, for the above reason, we see no infirmity in that direction - Decided against assessee - ITA No.: 3493/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 4-3-2019 - Mr P P Bhatt, President and Pramod Kumar Vice President For The appellant : Ankit Talsania For The Respondent : Subhash Bains ORDER Per Pramod Kumar, VP: 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsideration of ₹ 4,50,000 was taken and, therefore, income of ₹ 52,73,470 remain untaxed which resulted in under assessment of income under the head capital gain. 4. It was in this backdrop that the revision proceedings under section 263 were initiated. When assessee was put to notice on this aspect, it was explained by the assessee that the Assessing Officer had specifically looked into the matter of application of Section 50C, and it was after due verification of records and evidences called for that the assessment order in question was passed. In more specific terms, learned Commissioner s attention was drawn to the letter dated 9th December 2013 passed by the Assessing Officer, and assessee s reply thereto, and the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arly mentioned in the sale deed , that index copy dated 3rd June 2011 (i.e. after the date of sale deed) clearly shows the said land as an agricultural land and that jantri value of said agricultural land is ₹ 4,900 per sq mtr which was clearly mentioned as per letter of Superintendent of Stamps, Gandhinagar, Gujarat . It was further clarified that the value of ₹ 11,750 per square meter on which stamp duty is paid by the purchaser is for non agricultural land . The assessee thus explained that the sale consideration is less than the stamp duty valuation for the land sold, and then he pointed out the computation of conversion premium paid by the assessee was on the basis of valuation of agricultural land. This plea, however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g order, but the Assessing Officer chose to remain silent on the same. As observed by Hon ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Gee Vee Enterprises Vs ACIT (99 ITR 375), The position and function of the Income-tax Officer is very different from that of a civil court. The statements made in a pleading proved by the minimum amount of evidence may be accepted by a civil court in the absence of any rebuttal. The civil court is neutral. It simply gives decision on the basis of the pleading and evidence which comes before it. The Income-tax Officer is not only an adjudicator but also an investigator. He cannot remain passive in the face of a return which is apparently in order but calls for further inquiry. It is his duty to ascertain the trut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed view, was unsustainable in law. Therefore, even if the matter was examined by the Assessing Officer and it was a conscious call of the Assessing Officer to accept the plea of the assessee, such a situation would not take the matter outside the ambit of Section 263 as the view adopted by the Assessing Officer was clearly unsustainable in law. Having said that, we must add that there can be other legal reasons for grant of relief on merits, and that area is not yet explored by, or before, us. In any case, all that the learned Commissioner has directed is examination of the claim on merits and, for the above reason, we see no infirmity in that direction. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we uphold t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
