9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2025X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal in that case being Tribunal order rendered in the case of Smt. Sita Bai Khetan Vs. ITO [ 2016 (11) TMI 955 - ITAT JAIPUR] and Rahul Constructions [ 2012 (1) TMI 229 - ITAT PUNE] hold that in the facts of the present case, no addition is justified and therefore, delete the same. No merit of the case, the technical and legal issue raised by assessee as per ground nos. 2 and 3 becomes of academic interest and hence, I hold that no adjudication is called for on that aspect. - ITA No. 1141/Bang/2018 - - - Dated:- 4-5-2018 - Shri Arun Kumar Garodia, Accountant Member Appellant by: Shri V. Chandrashekar, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, IRS (DR) ORDER Shri A.K. Garodia, This appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and circumstances of the case. The learned Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that mere participation in an invalid assessment proceedings cannot cure the procedural aspect of validity of proper assumption of jurisdiction on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Without Prejudice the appellant denies itself liable to taxed over and above the income reported by the appellant in the revised return of income amounting to ₹ 7,72,330/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned authorities below were not justified in adding a sum of ₹ 4,70,400/- by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case, without properly appreciating the reasons f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal order rendered in the case of M/s. John Fowler (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 7545/Mum/2014 dated 25.01.2017. He submitted a copy of this Tribunal order and drawn my attention to para nos. 5 to 7 of this Tribunal order and pointed out that it was held by Tribunal in this case that if the difference between the valuation as per stamp duty and the sale consideration received by the assessee is less than 15%, in such circumstances no addition can be made. He also pointed out that the Tribunal in this case has followed two other Tribunal orders rendered in the case of Smt. Sita Bai Khetan Vs. ITO in ITA No. 823/JP/2013 dated 27.07.2016 and in the case of Rahul Constructions Vs. DCIT as reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
