Late S.Nageswara Rao, Rep.By S.Aravind Prasad, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1179/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 117921714 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR SHRI K E B RENG
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 50C; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI B E F O R E DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. ITA NO.1179(MDS)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 LATE S.NAGESWARA RAO, REP. BY S.ARAVIND PRASAD, 3A, KARTHIC DEV APARTMENTS, ABHIRAMAPURAM, CHENNAI- 600 018. PAN - ABUPN8215B. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE II(2), CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCA TE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI K.E.B.RENGARAJAN, JR .STDG.COUNSEL. DATE OF HEARING : 11 TH AUGUST, 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 TH AUGUST, 2011 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: - - ITA NO.1179 OF 2011 2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2007-08. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-II AT CHENNAI DATED 2-5-2011 AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COM PLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING A PORTION OF THE LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS RECOMPUTED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TRANS FER OF THE CINEMA THEATRE AT VIJAYAWADA. IT IS THE CASE OF TH E REVENUE THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADOPTION OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF ` 6,44,55,000/- AS AGAINST THE ADMITTED CONSIDERATIO N OF ` 3 CRORES ON APPLICATION OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IS ERRONEOUS AND INVALID. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT S ECTION 50C HAS NO APPLICATION IN THE PRESENT CASE. 3. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CONSIDERING T HIS ISSUE IN DETAIL WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY COME TO A LAWFUL CONCLUSION AFTER OBTAINING A VALUATION REPOR T FROM THE DVO. THIS ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY REMITTED BACK TO TH E ASSESSING - - ITA NO.1179 OF 2011 3 OFFICER FOR FRESH DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS DIRECTED TO GIVE AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE. 4. THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF COST OF IMPROVEMENT AND COST OF ACQUISITION RAISED IN GROUND NOS.7 AND 8 ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 5. IN RESULT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THURSDAY, THE 11 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 11 TH AUGUST, 2011. V.A.P. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F.