TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 870
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e agricultural land sold by the appellant is not a capital asset u/s 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961 being beyond the notified limits. This addition is uncalled for and deserves to be deleted. 4. That the Ld. CIT (A) - 2, Chandigarh is unjustified in upholding the order of the Ld. Assessing Officer regarding addition of Rs. 24,64,857/- under the head Long Term Capital Gains as the Ld. Assessing Officer has applied his own fair market value of the land as on 01-04-1981 instead of the value taken by the appellant on the basis of valuation report certified by a Government Approved Qualified Valuer. This addition is uncalled for and deserves to be deleted. 5. That any other ground may kindly be allowed to be taken at the time of appeal with due permission. 2. At the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was passed over. In the second round also, no one was present. Accordingly, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances on record after hearing the ld. Sr.DR it was deemed appropriate to proceed with the present appeal ex-parte qua the assessee appellant on merits. 3. The record shows that the appeal of the assessee was dismis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ever, in the absence of any material on record by way of submissions etc. or for that matter any representation on behalf of the assessee despite opportunity the challenge fails. As noticed, considering the submissions of the Revenue, and on a consideration of the material available on record, I find no good reason available on record which would justify an interference in the conclusion arrived at. Being satisfied with the same on the facts as they stand Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 7. On a perusal of the facts relatable to the issues raised in ground No. 3 and 4 by the assessee, it is seen that the assessee is found to have sold land at village Ballomajra, Mohali during the relevant assessment year alongwith others. Based on the information made available to the Assessing Officer (AO) that capital gains on the sale of these lands has escaped assessment, the A.O initiated re-assessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Considering the computation of income filed on behalf of the assessee during the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee has declared capital gains at 'nil' after claiming deduction u/s 54F. The A.O. required....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8.1 These submissions did not find favour with the CIT(A) who held that; "the cases relied upon by the appellant are distinguishable from the facts in the case of the assessee as in this case assessing officer has not substituted the valuation report by his own subjective estimation but based on factual information obtained from revenue authority. Therefore, fair market value adopted by the assessing officer is upheld. Ground of appeal No. 2 is dismissed." 8.2. The assessee's submission that the land being situated in a rural area beyond the municipal limits was not a capital area, also did not find favour with the CIT(A). The assessee supported its case by relying upon Report of a Patwari. The evidence filed was considered to be vague and infact discarded relying upon the valuer's report filed by the assessee at the assessment stage. The AO had rejected the very same Report as being based on personal opinions instead of evidences. 9. The ld. Sr.DR relied on the consistent orders of the tax authority. However, she was unable to address on query why the matter was not referred to the DVO if the Registered Valuer's Report was to be discarded by the AO and relied upon by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... re-oriented to consciously acknowledge that the duty and power to collect taxes is not being exercised on behalf of an alien foreign power in a colonial state who may have needed to fill its coffers by subjecting its colonies to the arbitrary actions. The power is exercised on behalf of the State and pre-supposes that it is exercised responsibly and fairly." Similarly it has also been observed in the aforesaid decision that; "In today's digital world, tax compliances necessarily have increased, with Banks, Land Revenue Authorities being integrated with tax authorities. However, the benefit of actual and complete knowledge of financial nuances and Taxing Statutes coupled with computer literacy has remained restricted to a large extent only to a few experts. The tax authorities constitute some of these few elites who have been equipped by the State by providing training and courses in order to hone the skill and competence with the use of cutting edge technology. I am of the view that the rash attitude of adopting the dangerous policy and philosophy of "us against them" in a free nation is to be strongly repelled and crushed. The ignorance and helplessness of the masses who are requ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Hon'ble Madras High Court in W.P.No. 3849 of 2019 and W.M.P. No. 4278 of 2019 Mrs. Kannammal Vs ITO dated 13.02.2019. The Court noticing that the assessee while moving a Stay Application relying on the said Circulars as noticed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Mahindra Mills 243 ITR 56 (S.C) observes that in the Stay Application the assessee may not have specifically invoked the three parameters for the grant of stay, it is incumbent upon the assessing officer to examine the existence of a prima facie case as well as call upon the assessee to demonstrate financial stringency, if any and arrive at the balance of convenience in the matter. The relevant extract from the decision is extracted hereunder for the sake of completeness : "Of course the petition seeking stay filed by the petitioner is itself cryptic. However, as noted / by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income tax vs Mahindra Mills, ((2008) 296 ITR 85 (Mad)) in the context of grant of depreciation, the Circular of the Central Board of Revenue (No. 14 (SL- 35) of 1955 dated April 11, 1955) requires the officers of the department 'to assist a taxpayer in every reason....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uty on the officer to allow depreciation if the assessee does not want to claim that. Provision for claim of depreciation is certainly for the benefit of the assessee. If it does not wish to avail that benefit for some reason, benefit cannot be forced upon him. It is for the assessee to see if the claim of depreciation is to his advantage. Rather Income-tax Officer should advise him not to claim depreciation if that course is beneficial to the assessee. That would be in our view the spirit of the circular dated April 11, 1955." 10.5. Though certain extracts from order dated 15.03.2019 in ITA 340/CHD/2017 in the case of Shri Iqbal Singh Vs ITO, Mohali have already been quoted, however it would be appropriate to also extract the following paras from the order: "8.1 It would also be appropriate to refer to some relevant facts noticed in the exercise of decision making powers exercised by the Ld. CIT(A). It is seen that admittedly fresh evidence by way of a Valuation Report was filed before the CIT(A) without a proper application. I do not find any reason on record as to why the said authority failed to responsibly advise the tax payer to come by way of a proper application....