Baban L Tingre [ HUF ], Pune V. ITO, Pune

ITA 1071/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5289 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Benefit of exemption

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1071/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) BABAN L. TINGRE (HUF), S.NO.36/2/2, ROAD NO.5, TINGRENAGAR, PUNE PAN NO. AAFHB 5031H .. APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD-2(3), PUNE .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJAY SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMOR DATE OF HEARING : 16-09-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17-09-2013 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 17-01-2012 OF THE CIT(A) II, PUNE RELATING TO ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAS CHALLE NGED THE VALIDITY OF RE-OPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AND DETERMINATION OF I NCOME AT RS.26,39,283/- AS AGAINST RS.15,123/- RETURNED BY T HE ASSESSEE AFTER REFERRING THE MATTER TO THE VALUATION OFFICER FOR V ALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND DENYING BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S.54F. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, REFERRING TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITA NO.638/PN/2010 AND ITA NO. 639/PN/2010 ORDER DATED 17-02-2012 FOR A.Y. 2006-07 IN CASE OF THE OT HER 2 CO-OWNERS [I.E. RAMESH L. TINGRE (HUF) AND ROHIDAS L. RINGRE (HUF)] SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATING THE 2 ISSUE AFRESH. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THIS A PPEAL ALSO SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AFRESH ALONG WITH THAT OF THE OTHER 2 CO-OWNERS. THE LD. DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJECTION FOR THE ABOVE PROPOSITION MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE, THEREFORE, RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE IS SUE AFRESH AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW KEEPING IN MIND THE DIRECTION O F THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF THE OTHER 2 CO-OWNERS. NEEDLESS TO SAY THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL GIVE DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOL D AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED : 17 TH SEPTEMBER 2013 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-II, PUNE 4. THE CIT-II, PUNE 5. D.R. B BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE