Gulabdas Yogendrakumar, Salem V. ITO Ward 1(1), Salem

CO 40/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1401 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI . , , BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 2967 /CHNY/ 2017 & C.O.NO.40/CHNY/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2011 - 12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), SALEM.636 007. VS. L ATE MR. GULABDAS YOGENDRAKUMAR REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS : SMT.Y.DHARMISTHA,(WIFE) SMT.G.DEEPA,(DAUGHTER) SMT.S.JEENA,(DAUGHTER) SHRI Y.VIGNESH(SON) 25/8-A,KALLANKUTHU STREET, SALEM 636 001. [ PAN AAIPY 2253 P] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT /CROSS OBJECTOR ) / APPELLANT BY : MR. AR.V.SREENIVASAN,ADD.C.I.T D.R /RESPONDENT BY : MR. T.VASUDEVAN,ADVOCATE ! / DATE OF HEARING : 19 - 05 - 20 20 '#$% ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 - 05 - 20 20 !' / O R D E R PER S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE REVENUE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM IN ITA NO.38/2014-15 DATED 31.08.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12. THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA NO.2967/CHNY/2017 CO NO.40/CHNY/2018 LATE GULABDAS YOGENDRAKUMAR :- 2 -: FILED A CROSS-OBJECTION AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). HENCE, WE HEARD BOTH THE APPEAL AND T HE CROSS- OBJECTION TOGETHER AND DISPOSING THE SAME BY THIS C OMMON ORDER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THA T THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS.50 LAKHS AND HENCE THE REVENUES APPEAL WO ULD BE COVERED BY THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019, F IXING THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.50 LAKHS. THE LD.DR ON VERIFI CATION ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.50 LAKHS. 3. ON HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFF ECT IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS LESS THAN RS. 50 LAKHS. THE CBDT IN I TS CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DATED 08.08.2019 INSTRUCTED ITS OFFICERS TO WITHDRAW ALL THE APPEALS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT WHERE THE TAX EFFEC T IS LESS THAN RS. 50 LAKHS. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINI ON THAT THIS CIRCULAR OF CBDT IS BINDING ON THE OFFICERS OF THE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, THE REVENUE CANNOT PROCEED FURTHER IN THIS APPEAL. ACCO RDINGLY, THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE STANDS DIS MISSED. 5. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY O F 8 DAYS IN FILING THE CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING THAT DUE TO ASSESSEES APPEAL ITA NO.2967/CHNY/2017 CO NO.40/CHNY/2018 LATE GULABDAS YOGENDRAKUMAR :- 3 -: FILE/PAPERS MIXED UP WITH OTHER FILES IN COUNSELS OFFICE, THE DELAY WAS CAUSED. IMMEDIATELY, AFTER TRACING THE FILE, THE CR OSS OBJECTIONS WAS FILED ON 26.04.2018 WITH A DELAY OF 8 DAYS. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE CROSS OBJECTIONS IS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON. IT WAS PRAYED THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. 5.1 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THERE WA S SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE STIPULATED TIM E. THEREFORE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 6. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIV ED RENT OF .10,000/- PER MONTH. HOWEVER, THE LD. A.O. ESTIMATE D THE ANNUAL LETTING VALUE (ALV) OF PROPERTY AT MANTRI PARADISE, BANGALORE AT .15,000/- PER MONTH HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEI VED RENT FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 AT .5,000/- PER MONTH, WHICH WAS ENHANCED TO .10,000/- PER MONTH DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009- 10 AND DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11 ALSO, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED .10,000/- PER MONTH. DURING THE PERIOD OF MARCH,2014, AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT, THE A.O. HELD THAT THE RENTAL INCOME PER MONTH FROM MANTRI PARADISE FLAT IS IN THE RANGE OF .22,000/- TO .24,000/-. THEREFORE, THE A.O. TREATED THE ALV AT .15,000/-. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. IS NOT CORRECT IN ESTIMATING THE RENT AL INCOME @ 15,000/- PER MONTH WHILE THE ACTUAL RENTAL RECEIPT WAS .10,000/- PER MONTH. ITA NO.2967/CHNY/2017 CO NO.40/CHNY/2018 LATE GULABDAS YOGENDRAKUMAR :- 4 -: 7. PER CONTRA, THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS O F THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSI ONS OF THE LD. A.R. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT DURING THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE RE NTAL INCOME RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT REASONABLE AND HENCE, THE AD DITION MADE BY THE A.O. IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. THEREFORE, THE A.O IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION.. 9. THE NEXT ISSUE IS THAT THE A.O DISALLOWED THE A SSESSEES CLAIM OF INTEREST PAID TO THE TUNE OF .1,50,000/- ON HOUSING LOAN (SELF-OCCUPIED PROPERTY). IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT TH E ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE HAVING 50% SHARE EACH IN THE PROPERTY, AND THE INVESTMENT WAS MADE IN THEIR NAME, SINCE THE BANK LOAN HAD TO BE T AKEN IN THE NAME OF CHILDREN DUE TO ASSESSEES AGE. INTEREST ON LOAN WAS NOT CLAIMED BY THE CHILDREN IN THEIR BOOKS. IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESS MENT MADE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, AND ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-1 8, THE A.O. HAS EXAMINED THIS ISSUE AND ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF INTEREST ON HOUSING LOAN OF .1,50,000/- AND .2,00,000/- RESPECTIVELY. THEREFORE, THE LD. A.R PLEADED TO ALLOW THE ASSESSE ES CLAIM. 10. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ERRO R, IF ANY, COMMITTED BY THE A.O. IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR, CANNOT BE THE B ASIS FOR ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. ITA NO.2967/CHNY/2017 CO NO.40/CHNY/2018 LATE GULABDAS YOGENDRAKUMAR :- 5 -: 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSM ENTS OF SUBSEQUENT TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS, SUPRA, THE ASSESSEES CLAIM I S ACCEPTED, ON DUE SCRUTINY, WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE LD. A.R. AND HENCE, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEES C LAIM OF INTEREST ON THE HOUSING LOAN. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE C.O S TANDS ALLOWED. 13. TO SUM UP, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED A ND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 20 TH MAY, 2020 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) # !$ /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & / CHENNAI ' / DATED: 20 TH MAY,2020. K S SUNDARAM ( ) *+ , +$ / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. ( ( - / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. +./ 01 / DR 3. ( ( - () / CIT(A) 6. /45 6 / GF