Smt. G. Rama Devi, Tirupathi V. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Tirupathi

ITA 1179/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1472 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: E PHALGUNA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: AMISHA S GUPT
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift; Additional evidence
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1. 1229/HYD/12 2009- 10 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), TIRUPATHI. SMT. G. RAMA DEVI, TIRUPATHI (PAN AGYPG9736B) 2. 1179/HYD/12 -DO- SMT. G. RAMA DEVI, TIRUPATHI (PAN AGYPG9736B) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), TIRUPATHI. C.O. 3 131/HYD/12 (IN ITA NO. 1229/HYD/11) -DO- -DO- -DO- REVENUE BY : SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI E. PHALGUNA KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 21/11/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : /0 1/2013 ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M.: THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), GUNTUR DATED 29/05/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED C.O., WHICH IS IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE SAID CIT(A). 2 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI ITA NO. 1229/HYD/2012 APPEAL BY THE REVENUE 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE IS DERIVING INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND OTHER SOURC ES, BESIDES INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE, FILED HER RETURN O F INCOME FOR THE AY 2009-10 ON 29/09/2009, ADMITTING TOTAL INCOM E OF RS. 51,87,521/- AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 28,20,14 8/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD GROWN MANGO GARDENS AND OTHER INTERCRO PS IN THE LANDS HELD BY HER TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 45.83 ACRES AND SOLD THE MANGO VARIETY OF TOTAPURI TO M/S GALLA FOODS (P) LTD. 3. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3), THE AO HAD OPINED THAT DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD THE RATE OF THE VARIETY OF TOTAPURI MANGOES PER KG., WAS BETWEEN RS. 6 TO 9 AND THE INCOME ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 28,20,148/- WAS ON HIGH SIDE. THE AO HAD ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESS EE HAD ADMITTED AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM THE SAME LANDS FO R THE AYS 2007-08 & 2008-09 WERE AT RS. 9,69,617/- AND RS. 17,80,824/- ONLY. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, TH E AO HAD RESTRICTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO RS. 12 LAKHS AND THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 16,20,150/- WAS TREATED AS IN COME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 4. THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE STATED TO HAVE BE EN PURCHASED 45.32 ACRES OF LAND 994 SQ. YARDS DURING THE YEARS 1994-95, 1998-99, 2001-02 AND 2002-03, WHICH WERE UNACCOUNTED FOR DURING THOSE YEARS AND HENCE, THESE LANDS WERE SHOWN AS GIFT DURING THE CURRENT YEAR AND ADMI TTED GIFT OF LAND VALUING AT RS. 14,80,899/-. DURING THE COURSE OF 3 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO HAD CALLED FOR THE V ALUE OF THESE UNACCOUNTED ASSETS AS ON 31/03/2009. THE ASSE SSEE HAD STATED THAT SHE HAD PURCHASED THE LANDS FROM VARIOU S PARTIES AND NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THOSE YEARS AND SINCE SELL ERS OF THE LANDS WERE DIFFERENT, SHE HAD ACCOUNTED FOR THESE A GRICULTURAL LANDS AND HOUSE SITE AS GIFT. THE AO WAS OF THE OP INION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONCEALED THE ABOVE INVESTMENTS AN D THERE WAS NO DONOR AND DONE RELATIONSHIP TO TREAT THESE A SSETS AS GIFT AND ALSO NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BY THE A SSESSEE SUCH AS DOCUMENT NO., DATE OF PURCHASE, VALUE AS ON 31/0 3/2009, ETC. HENCE, THE AO VALUED THE INVESTMENTS AT RS. 1 CRORE TREATING THE SAME AS UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT AND BRO UGHT TO TAX. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE APPEAL BEF ORE THE CIT(A). 6. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSE E FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHEREIN IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INCOME TAX ASSESSEE WITH PAN AGYPG9736B AND SHE IS A NON-RESIDENT INDIAN, RESIDING ABROAD FOR THE PAST 2 0 YEARS AND HENCE FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE INDIAN INC OME ONLY. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE GAVE THE POWER ATTORNEY IN FAVOUR OF HER FATHER, DR. G. RAMACHANDRA NAIDU T O CARRY OUT ALL THE NECESSARY ACTIVITIES FOR EARNING INCOME IN INDIA. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE OWNED 31.21 ACRES AT SETTIGUNTA VILLAGE, CHITVEL MANDAL, KADAPA DT. FOR THE PAST 18 YEARS AND HAS BEEN EARNING AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE PAST S EVERAL YEARS, HENCE, THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED A NET AGRICULTU RAL INCOME 4 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI OF RS. 28,20,148/-. FURTHER, IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GROWING MANGOES IN THE ASSESSEES GARDENS OF 64.64 ACRES IN TOTAL, WHEREIN, DIFFERENT QUALITIES OF VAR IETIES, VIZ., BANGENAPALLI, ALPHANSO, NEELAM, MALGOVA AND TOTAPUR I MANGOES HAVE BEEN GROWN. IT WAS STATED THAT THE COM PANY GALLA FOODS LTD. IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF EX TRACTION OF MANGO PULP OF TOTAPURI ALPHANSO VARIETY, OTHER VARIETIES AND EXPORTING THE BANGENAPALLI VARIETY TO FOREIGN COU NTRIES AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD THE ENTIRE CROP TO GALLA FOODS LTD. AND IN TURN THE SAID COMPANY PAID THE CONSIDER ATION BY WAY OF CHEQUES. THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT GIVEN BY THE COMPANY, AND THE GOODS RECEIPT NOTES CONTAINING THE DETAILS OF QUANTITIES SUPPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A). IT WA S CONTENDED THAT THE AO DID NOT BASE HIS ADDITION ON ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND HE DID NOT COMPARE THE INC OME EARNED BY OTHERS IN THE SAME AREA. IT WAS FURTHER C ONTENDED THAT WITHOUT HAVING ANY EVIDENCE THE AO MADE THE AD DITION ON THE BASIS OF CONJECTURES AND SURMISES, WHICH IS BAD IN LAW. 7. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, OBSERVED THAT MERE PRODUCTION OF RECEIPTS FOR THE IMPUGNED SALES IS NOT SUFFICIENT, BECAUSE THE SALES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WERE MUCH HIGHER THAN EARLIER YEARS S ALES AND THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO NOT CITED ANY EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES AS TO WHY SUCH EXORBITANT RATES WERE QUOTED. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE EXPLANATION THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD SUPPLIED QUALITY MANGOES TO THE PURCHASER OF PRODUC E IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND SELF SERVING AND THE DOCUMENT PRODUCED 5 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IS A CERTIFICATE FROM THE TAHSILDAR FROM THAVANAM PALLE DATED 25/01/2012 THAT AS PER THE REVENUE ENQUIRY THE ASSE SSEE IS GETTING AVERAGE ANNUAL INCOME FOR THE YEAR FROM 200 8 TO 2011 PER YEAR ABOUT RS. 18,60,000/- THROUGH AGRICULTURE. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THIS CERTIFICATE WAS GIVEN FOR AN ACR EAGE OF 35.57, WHEREAS, AS PER THE RECORDS THE ACREAGE UNDE R CULTIVATION BY THE ASSESSEE WAS 45.83. THE CIT(A) F URTHER OBSERVED THAT THE CERTIFICATE GIVEN BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IS AN INDICATION OF CROP TRENDS AND THE PROBABLE IN COME THAT MAY BE EARNED. THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS AN INDICATION, BUT, NOT PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, AS THE SAID REPORT WAS FOR THE YEARS 2008 TO 2011, THEREFORE, THIS CERTIFICATE GIVES THE TREN DS, BUT NOT THE ACTUAL PRODUCE AND VALUE THEREOF. 8. THE CIT(A) HELD THAT IN THE EARLIER TWO ASSESSME NT YEARS OF AY 2007-08 AND 2008-09, THE ASSESSEE UNDER SIMIL AR LAND HOLDINGS RETURNED AGRICULTURAL INCOMES OF RS. 9,69, 617/- AND RS. 17,80,824/- RESPECTIVELY, WHICH POSITION WAS AC CEPTED BY THE REVENUE. THE CIT(A) FURTHER HELD THAT THE AO HA D RESTRICTED THE INCOME TO A VERY LOW FIGURE, WHICH I S NOT REALISTIC WHEN COMPARED TO THE EARLIER RETURNS. NEVERTHELESS, THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 28,20,148/- I.E. APPROXI MATELY 58% IS ALSO NOT CORRECT. THEREFORE, TAKING INTO PAST RE GARDS AND FACTS AND FIGURES OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, THE C IT(A) RESTRICTED THE INCOME TO RS. 19,00,000/- AS AGAINST RS. 28,20,20,148/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI 9. WITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 1.00 CRORE M ADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENTS IN PUR CHASE OF ASSETS, THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TH AT THE AO ADDED THE MARKET VALUE OF LANDS GIFTED DURING EARLI ER YEARS AS CURRENT YEAR INCOME AND THE AO STATED THAT HE IS NO T CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE UNACC OUNTED LAND IS GIFT RECEIVED FROM RELATIVES. THE AR OF THE ASSE SSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED GIFTS FROM HER RELATIVES BY WAY OF LANDS PURCHASED AND REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE FYS. 1994-05, 1998-99, 2 001-02 AND 2002-03 AND THESE LANDS WERE NOT ACCOUNTED DURI NG THOSE EARLIER YEARS BY THE ASSESSEE, IN THE BOOKS OF ACC OUNT AS THE ASSESSEE WAS UNAWARE OF THE FULL INFORMATION. IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE ACCOUNTED THE SAME DURING THE PRE VIOUS YEAR 2008-09, THUS, A SUM OF RS. 14,80,899/- WAS CREDITE D TO CAPITAL A/C AS GIFTS AND LAND ACCOUNT WAS DEBITED A S ASSET. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED A COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEE T AS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. IT WAS FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT ALL THE DETAILS OF THESE LANDS AND HOUSE SITES WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO AND ALL THESE DOCUMENTS PERTAIN TO PURCHASE OF LAND BY THE ASSESSEES RELATIVES IN THE ASSESSEES NAME DUR ING THE EARLIER YEARS. IT WAS STATED THAT THESE LANDS WERE REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AT MARKET VALUES PRESCRIBE D BY THE GOVT. ITSELF. AS THESE LANDS WERE NOT ACCOUNTED DUR ING THE EARLIER YEARS, THE SAME WERE ACCOUNTED DURING THE P REVIOUS YEAR 2008-09. 10. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESS EE, THE CIT(A) HELD THAT WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS, THE VIE WS OF THE AO 7 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI WERE REFLECTED IN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69, AS PER WHICH, UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS CAN BE ADDED TO THE INCOME ONLY IN THOSE ASSESSMENT YEARS RELEVANT FOR THE YEAR IN WHI CH INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE BUT NOT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, PROVIDED CERTAIN CONDITIONS ARE SATI SFIED. HE FURTHER HELD THAT SINCE THE YEAR OF ACQUISITION IS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE SALE DEEDS, THE ACTION IF ANY HAS TO BE INITIATED FOR THE RELEVANT YEARS, BUT NOT IN THE YE AR UNDER CHALLENGE, AS NO GIFTS (PURCHASE OF PROPERTIES IN T HE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE) WERE MADE TO THE ASSESSEE DURING SUCH PERIOD. THE CIT(A) ALSO HELD THAT SINCE NO ADDITION IS POSS IBLE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DUE TO THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 69, IT BECOMES ACADEMIC. 11. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 12. AS REGARDS 1 ST GROUND OF APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT(A) ADMITTED CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENC E IN THE FORM OF CERTIFICATE FROM THE TAHSILDAR FROM THAVANA M PALLE DATED 25/01/2012, WHICH WAS NOT PLACED BEFORE THE A SSESSING OFFICER BY THE ASSESSEE. AS SUCH, THERE IS A VIOLAT ION OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE IN CLINED TO REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF MATERIAL PLACED BEFOR E THE CIT(A). THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 13. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS. 1.00 CRORE AS UN ACCOUNTED INVESTMENT, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ENTIRE LANDS WERE GIFTED BY WAY OF PURCHASE IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE BY T HE 8 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI RELATIVES IN EARLIER YEARS. NOTHING WAS INVESTED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO AY 2009-10. EVEN IF THE COST OF TH E LAND NEEDS TO BE ADDED AS INVESTMENT U/S 69B, THE SAME CAN BE ADDED ONLY IN THOSE RESPECTIVE EARLIER YEARS AND NOT IN T HE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN CONS IDERING THE PRESENT MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AND TREATED THE SA ME AS CURRENT YEARS INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO OK THE MARKET VALUE OF LAND AS ON 31/03/2009 WHICH IS NOT THE BASIS AND ASSUMED THAT THE ENTIRE VALUE OF THE LAND WOULD BE RS. 1 CRORE. WE FIND THAT A SUM OF RS. 14,80,899/- WAS C REDITED TO THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT AS GIFT AND LAND ACCOUNT WAS DE BITED AS ASSET. THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT SOME O F THE RELATIVES OF THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE IMPUGNE D PLOTS AND LANDS AND GOT THEM REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF TH E ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE RELATIVES WERE NOT AWARE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE IT ACT AND THEY WERE OF TH E OPINION THAT IF THE LANDS WERE REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF TH E ASSESSEE IT TANTAMOUNT TO GIFTING THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE. AS SOON AS THE ASSESSEE CAME IN POSSESSION OF SUCH DEEDS, THE ASSE SSEE CREDITED THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT BY THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE INVESTMENTS AT RS. 14,80,899/- AND DEBITED THE LAND ACCOUNT ACCORDINGLY. 14. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT SINCE THE YEAR OF AC QUISITION IS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE SALE DEEDS, THE ONLY ACTIO N IF ANY HAS TO BE INITIATED FOR THE RELEVANT YEARS, BUT NOT IN THE YEAR UNDER CHALLENGE, AS NO GIFTS WERE MADE TO THE ASSESSEE DU RING SUCH PERIOD. IF AT ALL INVESTMENTS COULD BE ADDED TO TH E INCOME ONLY IN THOSE ASSESSMENT YEARS IN WHICH INVESTMENTS HAD BEEN 9 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 OF THE ACT, BUT NOT IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 15. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO. 1179/HYD/2012 APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE 16. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS O F APPEAL IN THIS APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND IS NOT BASED ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE CLAI M OF THE APPELLANT IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO RS. 19,00,000/- ONLY AS AGAINST RS. 28,20,148/- ORIGINA LLY RETURNED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONSIDERING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR AY 2009-10 ON THE BASIS OF TREND OF INCOME ADMITTED IN EARLIER YEARS. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE CLAIM ON THE BASIS OF THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE AGRI CULTURAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT, IN-SPITE OF PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE HOLDING OF AGRICULTURAL L AND OF 64.64 ACRES AND INCOME CERTIFICATE FROM TAHSILDAR F OR 35.57 ACRS. 17. AS WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN REVENUES APPEAL (SUPRA) IN RESTRICTING THE AGRICULTURAL INCO ME TO RS. 19,00,000/-, AND REMITTED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION, FOLLOWING THE CONC LUSIONS DRAWN THEREIN, WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER 10 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 18. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. C.O. NO. 131/HYD/2012 (IN ITA NO. 1229/HYD/2012 B Y THE ASSESSEE. 19. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE C.O. ARE AGAINST THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WHEREIN GROUND NO S. 2, 3 & 4 IN ITA NO. 1229/HYD/12 THE REVENUE HAS OBJECTED T O THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO RS. 19,00,000/- WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSES SING OFFICER TO PERUSE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE A SSESSEE BY WAY OF CERTIFICATE FROM TAHSILDAR, TAVANAMPALLI DAT ED 25/01/2012, WHICH IS AGAINST RULE 46A OF THE IT RUL ES. THIS HAS BEEN DECIDED IN ITA NO. 1229/HYD/12 WHEREIN WE HAVE REMITTED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. HENCE, THE GROUNDS 1 TO 4 RAISED IN C.O. BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. 20. GROUND NO. 5 OF THE C.O. HAS BEEN DECIDED IN RE VENUES APPEAL (SUPRA) WHEREIN WE HAVE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DISMISSED THE REVENUES AP PEAL. HENCE, THIS GROUND OF C.O. BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 11 ITA NOS. 1229 & 1179/H/2012 & C.O. NO. 131/H/12 SMT. G. RAMA DEVI 21. IN THE RESULT, THE C.O. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 22. TO SUM UP, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BEING ITA NO. 1229/HYD/12 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPO SES, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEING ITA NO. 1179/HYD/12 IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE C.O FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/01/2013. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAV AN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R HYDERABAD, DATED: 24 TH JANUARY, 2013 KV COPY TO:- 1) ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KT ROAD, TIRUPATHI 517 507. 2) SMT. G. RAMA DEVI, GIRIDRUSYA, AMAR RAJA CAMPUS, RENIGUNTA-KADAPA ROAD, KARAKAMBADI, TIRUPATI. 3) THE CIT (A), GUNTUR. 4) THE CIT, TIRUPATHI 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD.