Shri.Narayanaswamy Naidu , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(2), Bangalore

ITA 1219/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7629 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MANOJ KUMAR G
• Assessee Lawyers: GANGADHAR SASTRY ITP
• Section: 54

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1 219 /BANG/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 14 - 15 SHRI. NARAYANASWAMY NAIDU, NO. 14, 1 ST CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, SUDHAMANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 027. PAN : AAVPN 7472 J VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(2)(2), BENGALURU. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. GANGADHAR SASTRY, ITP REVENUE BY : DR. MANOJ KUMAR G, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 0 6 . 0 6 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 . 0 7 .201 8 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), INTER ALIA , ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1) CIT(A)'S ORDER IS OPPOSED TO THE LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2) CIT(A) ERRED IN COMING TO CONCLUSION THAT BUILDING IS NOT BUILT IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR AND BUILT EARLIER BASED ON ASSESSING OFFICER'S REMARK. 3) CIT(A) FAILED TO EXAMINE FORM NO V (FILED BEFORE BBMP) WHICH PROVES THAT NEW BUILDING IS BUILT IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR. IN SUBMISSION IT WAS ITA NO. 1219/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 3 EXPLAINED THAT FORM V IS FILED WHEN THERE IS ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION. CIT(A) FAILED TO EXAMINE AND ARRIVED AT WRONG CONCLUSION. 4) APPELLANT FILED ENOUGH DOCUMENTARY PROOF AND ESTABLISHED THAT BUILDING WAS BUILT IN THE PREVIOUS WHICH CIT(A) OVERLOOKED AND ARRIVED AT WRONG CONCLUSION CIT(A). 5) THE APPELLANT AVAILED HOUSING LOAN OF RS.33 LAKHS ON 05.09.2013 FROM KARNATAKA BANK FOR CONSTRUCTION AND NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FROM CONTRACTOR WAS FILED BEFORE CIT(A) TO PROVE THAT THE CONSTRUCTION WAS DONE IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR. 6) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REMARKED THAT BUILDING IS NOT CONSTRUCTED IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR WHICH IS ONLY ON SURMISE. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BROUGHT PHOTO GRAPHICS ON RECORD TO SHOW IT IS PARTLY COMMERCIAL BUILDING ETC, BUT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT BUILDING IS NOT BUILT IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR. 7) APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD OR DELETE ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 8) FOR THESE AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS TAKEN AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT MAY KINDLY BE HELD THAT CONSTRUCTION IS MADE IN THIS PREVIOUS YEAR AND ADDITIONS BE DELETED. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE RAISED UNDER SECTION 54 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE EVIDENCES FOR THE INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS BUT BEFORE THE CIT(A), ASSESSEE HAS PLACED THE EVIDENCES BUT IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE CIT(A) AND HE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO DISALLOWING DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 54 OF THE ACT. NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ALL THE NECESSARY RELEVANT EVIDENCES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE SENT TO ITA NO. 1219/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 3 THE AO TO RE-EXAMINE THE CLAIM IN THE LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCES FILED. THE LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 3. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS PLACED RELEVANT EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS, BUT THE SAME WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO AO TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH JULY, 2018. SD/- SD/- BANGALORE. DATED: 20 TH JULY, 2018. /NS/* COPY TO: 1. APPELLANTS 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, BANGALORE. (INTURI RAMA RAO) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER