TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... return was processed under section 143(1)(a). Subsequently, a notice under section 143(2) was issued and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) on March 28, 1995, fixing the total income at Rs. 1,31,020 including long-term capital gain of Rs. 72,500 after allowing deduction under section 48(2) of the Act. While computing the capital gain the assessee claimed to have received from his former tenants during the year under consideration a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 and this was shown as an additional compensation on the sale of property effected as per document No. 1488 of 1990, dated October 19, 1990. The Commissioner of Income-tax, on perusal of the records, formed the opinion that treating this sum of Rs. 1,50,000 as additional compens....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... balance portion of the property was also sold on May 15, 1991, for Rs. 1,50,000 during this period. Subsequently, the assessee by letter dated March 27, 1995, admitted that it was a mistake to mention a separate sale but in fact, the amount of Rs. 1,50,000 received from the tenants represented compensation for not evicting them. The Assessing Officer took the view that the assessee's contention regarding compensation cannot be accepted as true and correct since the letters issued to the tenants from whom the assessee is stated to have received the said sum were returned unserved. The Assessing Officer also noted that in the registered document of sale it was specifically stipulated that any further dealings by the tenants was to be with th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1990, dated October 19, 1990, it is specifically mentioned that all the future dealings by the tenants in respect of the shop rooms sold should be done with the new landlord directly and not with the assessee in the instant case. The Tribunal accordingly set aside the order of the first appellate authority and restored the order of the assessing authority. Sri Jayasankaran Nambiar, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the only grievance of the Department before the Tribunal was regarding the acceptance of the additional evidence in the form of confirmatory letters and the adjudication of the question by the first appellate authority. In other words, according to counsel, the contention of the Department was that when the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in support of the confirmatory letters. Sri P.K.R. Menon, learned senior standing counsel for taxes appearing for the respondent, submits that the Tribunal was perfectly justified in setting aside the order of the first appellate authority and in restoring the assessment order on the facts of the case and that no question of law much less any substantial question of law does arise from the order of the Tribunal. We have considered the rival contentions. It is true that the Department has filed the appeal before the Tribunal with the specific contention that the first appellate authority was not justified in entertaining the additional evidence and in deciding the issue without affording an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on August 28, 1995. If as a matter of fact the said documents were with the assessee he could have produced the same before the Assessing Officer so that the Assessing Officer would have gone into the genuineness of the said documents at that time itself. In fact the case of the assessee at that time before the Assessing Officer was totally different. The case was that the money which is deposited in the bank is the consideration paid by the tenants for permitting them to continue in occupation of the premises even after the sale of the property by the appellant. It is with reference to the said plea the Assessing Officer had referred to the registered sale deed where it is specifically stated that all future correspondence in respect of t....