SHRI. SN MOHAN (HUF), MADURAI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

CO 50/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9711 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition; Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !, # !$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2576/CHNY/2017 & C.O. NO.50/CHNY/2018 (IN I.T.A. NO.2576/CHNY/2017) & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI. V. M/S NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF), AGS AUTOMOBILES, VILANGUDI, MADURAI DINDIGUL MAIN ROAD, MADURAI. PAN : AAGHM 3049 D ()*/ APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT & CROSS-OBJECTOR) )* + , / APPELLANT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT -.)* + , / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE / + 0# / DATE OF HEARING : 20.11.2018 12' + 0# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.12.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 19, CHENNAI, DATED 03.07.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11-12. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS-OBJECTION AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER 2 I.T.A. NO.2576/CHNY/17 C.O. NO.50/CHNY/18 OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, WE HEARD BOTH THE APPEAL AND THE CROSS-OBJECTION TOGETHER AND DISPOSING OF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. THERE WAS A DELAY OF 19 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEA L BY THE REVENUE. THE REVENUE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR COND ONATION OF DELAY. WE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND THE LD.COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FIL ING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE STIPULATED TIME. THEREFORE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 3. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, SHRI A R.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VE RY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN 20 LAKHS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDER ED OPINION THAT THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT FIXING MONETARY LIMIT FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. NOW COMING TO THE CROSS-OBJECTION FILED BY THE A SSESSEE, THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANC E OF EXPENDITURE FOR PROVIDING MODERN KITCHEN IN THE FLAT AS COST OF ACQUISITION. REFERRING TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, SHRI G. BASKAR, THE LD.COUNSEL 3 I.T.A. NO.2576/CHNY/17 C.O. NO.50/CHNY/18 FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE COST OF MODERN KITCHEN HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS COST OF ASSET, THEREFORE, THE CIT( APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. WE HEARD THE LD. D.R. ALSO. BOTH THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND TH AT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD FOR PROVIDING MODERN K ITCHEN. EVEN BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, NO EVIDENCE IS PRODUCED FOR P ROVIDING MODERN KITCHEN AFTER PURCHASE OF FLAT. THEREFORE, THIS TR IBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AN D THE CROSS- OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 3 RD DECEMBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. ! ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 3 RD DECEMBER, 2018. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NO.2576/CHNY/17 C.O. NO.50/CHNY/18 + -056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )*/ APPELLANT 2. -.)*/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)-19, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI 5. 69 -0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.