2019 (10) TMI 733 - AT - Income Tax

Appeal Success: Tax Tribunal Allows Additional Evidence, Grants Exemptions

Shri Karam Chand, s/o. Shri Malik Ditta, C/o. M/s. Kissan Agro Properties Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Fatehabad.

The appeal was directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2009-2010 challenging the reopening of assessment under section 148 of the I.T. ... Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - long term capital gains computed by authorities below and also claimed exemption/deduction under sections 54B and 54F - application for admission of the additional evidences - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that additional evidences goes to the root of the matter and in the case of co-owner Shri Dharm Chand, the same have been admitted for disposal of the matter and matter have been remanded to the file of A.O. Therefore, following the Order in the case of Shri Dharm Chand [2019 (10) TMI 573 - ITAT DELHI] we admit the additional evidences. Since the A.O. has no occasion to examine these additional evidences, we set aside the Orders of the authorities below and restore the matter in issue to the file of A.O. with a direction to re-decide the issue - Appeal of Assessee allowed for statistical purposes. Issues:1. Reopening of assessment under section 148 of the I.T. Act2. Computation of long term capital gains3. Claiming exemption/deduction under sections 54B and 54F of the I.T. Act, 1961Reopening of Assessment under Section 148 of the I.T. Act:The appeal was directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2009-2010. The appellant challenged the reopening of the assessment under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The A.O. noted that the lands owned by the appellant were Capital Assets within the meaning of the Income Tax Act. The assessment was reopened under section 147 of the I.T. Act, and the A.O. computed long term capital gains arising from the transfer of land to M/s Soma New Town Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.'s order and did not allow the exemption claimed by the appellant under various sections of the I.T. Act.Computation of Long Term Capital Gains:The appellant challenged the computation of long term capital gains by the authorities below. The A.O. adopted the fair market value and calculated the long term capital gains. The appellant filed additional evidences to support their claim, including certificates, letters, notifications, and maps. The Tribunal admitted the additional evidences, considering them relevant to determine the tax liability. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the authorities below and remanded the matter to the A.O. for re-decision in light of the additional evidences, following a similar decision in a co-owner's case.Claiming Exemption/Deduction under Sections 54B and 54F of the I.T. Act, 1961:The appellant also claimed exemption/deduction under sections 54B and 54F of the I.T. Act, 1961. The additional evidences submitted by the appellant were deemed crucial in determining the tax liability. The Tribunal allowed the additional evidences, setting aside the orders of the authorities below and directing a re-decision by the A.O. after considering the additional evidences and other material on record. The appeal of the appellant was allowed for statistical purposes.This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the issues of reopening of assessment, computation of long term capital gains, and claiming exemption/deduction under specific sections of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Tribunal's decision to admit additional evidences and remand the matter for re-decision highlights the importance of supporting documentation in tax assessments.