ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Sun Housing Promoters, CHENNAI

ITA 1039/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52179 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JUNIOR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 1039/MDS/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-XV, CHENNAI 34. VS. M/S. SUN HOUSING PROMOTERS NO.92B, ELLAIAMMAN COLONY CATHEDRAL ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI 86. PAN AABFS 1374 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.E.B.RENGARAJAN, JUN IOR STANDING COUNSEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PHILIP GEORGE, ADVOCA TE DATE OF HEARING : 13 TH DECEMBER, 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 TH DECEMBER, 2011 O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE RELATES TO THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XII AT CHENNAI DATED ITA 1039/10 :- 2 -: 31.3.2010 AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETE D UNDER SEC.143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRE SENT APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPE ALS) HAS ERRED IN FIXING THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT ` 1,400/- PER SQ.FT. IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE RATE HAS BEEN FIXE D WITHOUT ANY BASIS. 3. WE CONSIDERED THE MATTER. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ESTIMATED THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT ` 1250/- PER SQ.FT. THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND, CONCEDED THE RATE OF ` 1577/- PER SQ.FT. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) FOUND THAT NEITHER THE ASSE SSING AUTHORITY HAS MADE OUT A CASE NOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUPPORTED ITS CASE, ON ANY MATERIAL BASIS. HE, THEREFORE, DIRECTED THE AS SESSING AUTHORITY TO ADOPT THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT ` 1400/- SQ.FT. 5. IT IS TO BE SEEN THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR T HE ASSESSING AUTHORITY HAS PLACED ANY MATERIALS BEFORE THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) TO ASCERTAIN THE CORRECTNESS O F THE ITA 1039/10 :- 3 -: RESPECTIVE VALUATION WORKED OUT BY THEM. THEY THEM SELVES HAVE DETERMINED THE RATE OF CONSTRUCTION BY THEIR RESPEC TIVE RATES ON AN APPROXIMATE BASIS. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO HARM IN FIXING THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT A REASONABLE RATE BY THE COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS). THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APP EAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. IT IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON TUESDAY, THE 13 TH OF DECEMBER, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 13 TH DECEMBER, 2011 MPO* COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR