ITO, Nagapattinam V. Shri A.V.M.Ahamed Kabeer, Koothanallur

ITA 1256/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8111 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P B SEKARAN
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 143(3); 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH B CHENNAI (BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ..... I.T.A. NO. 1255/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), NAGAPATTINAM. (APPELLANT) V. SMT. S.E.S.A. BALKEES AMMAL, NO.5-A, GANDHI NAGAR, KOOTHANALLUR. PAN : AAHPB6371Q (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO. 1256/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), NAGAPATTINAM. (APPELLANT) V. SHRI A.V.M. AHAMED KABEER, NO.20-B, GANDHI NAGAR, KOOTHANALLUR. PAN : AGCPA3329C (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO. 1257/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), NAGAPATTINAM. (APPELLANT) V. SHRI A.V.M. ZUBAIDA BEEVI, NO.8-B, GANDHI NAGAR, KOOTHANALLUR. PAN : AAEPZ8675Q (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NOS. 1255 TO 1258/MDS/10 2 I.T.A. NO. 1258/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), NAGAPATTINAM. (APPELLANT) V. SHRI A.V.M. NAZIMUDDIN, NO.5-A, GANDHI NAGAR, KOOTHANALLUR. PAN : AADPN5884A (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI P.B. SEKARAN RESPONDENTS BY: NONE O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, AGAINST THE DIFFERENT APPELLATE ORDER S DATED 3.5.2010 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TIRUCHIRAPALLI, IN THE CASE OF DIFFERENT ASSESSES. SINCE THE ISSUE RAISED IN ALL THE FOUR APPEALS IS COMMON, THE SAME WERE CLUBBED AND HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. VIDE THESE APPEALS, THE REVENUE HAS AGITATED THA T THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS WRONGLY INTERPRETED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 2(47) I.T.A. NOS. 1255 TO 1258/MDS/10 3 AND 50C TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSES ARE NOT LIABLE TO BE TAXED ON CAPITAL GAINS, WHICH HE RENDERED UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTIO NS 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147. THE REVENUE HAS FURTHER AGITATED THAT THE INSERTION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C WITH EFFECT FROM 1 ST APRIL 2003 AND FURTHER AMENDMENT WITH EFFECT FROM 1 ST OCTOBER, 2009 ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS CLARIFICATORY IN NATURE COVERING THE IMPUGNED TR ANSACTION PRIOR TO 1 ST APRIL, 2003. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES - RESPO NDENTS. HOWEVER, WE PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THESE APPEALS O N THE BASIS OF FACTS AND EXPLANATIONS AS BROUGHT ON RECORD AND ARE AVAILABLE. 4. WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE CIT( APPEALS) IN VIEW OF THE DETAILED OBSERVATION MADE BY THE LD. CI T(APPEALS) WITH RESPECT TO ALL THE ASSESSEES HAVING BEEN TREATED SI MILARLY BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN HIS ORDERS HAS DISTINGUISHED THE FA CTS IN THE CASE OF EACH ASSESSEE BY APPLYING THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMEN TS AS NOTED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS GROUNDS. IN HIS ORDERS THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS ALLOWED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES BY DIRECTING T HE ASSESSING I.T.A. NOS. 1255 TO 1258/MDS/10 4 OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE CAPITAL GAINS ON THE BASIS GUIDELINE VALUE IGNORING THE ACTUAL CONSIDERATION WHICH IS NOT SUST AINABLE IN LAW OR ON FACTS, WHICH WE UPHOLD. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUS ION OF HEARING ON THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- (U.B.S. BEDI) (K.K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. KRI. COPY FORWARDED TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENTS (3) CIT(A), TIRUCHIRAPALLI (4) CIT-II, TRICHY (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE