Kamal Prasad Makada, Hyderabad V. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1278/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7023 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K A SAI PRASAD
• Keywords: Capital Gains

Judgement Text

ITA NO 1278 OF 2019 KAMAL PRASAD MAKADA HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A SMC BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1278/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SHRI KAMAL PRASAD MAKADA HYDERABAD PAN: ATDPM0955E VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI K.A. SAI PRASAD, REVENUE BY : SMT. MATTA PADMA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 31/10/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/11/2019 ORDER THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2011-12 AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-3, HYDERABAD, DATED 11.6.2 019. 2. THE CIT (A) HAD DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR NON-PAYMENT OF ADMITTED TAX. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE SALE DEEDS REFERRED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE NOT PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTIES HELD OR SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THESE TWO PROPERTIES BE LONGED TO THE BUILDER AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SOLD ANY PRO PERTY, HE HAD NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME AND HAS NOT PAID ANY TAX AND THERE WAS NO DEEMED TAX TO BE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THE A SSESSEE HAD IN FACT MENTIONED ALL THESE FACTS BEFORE THE CIT (A ) BUT THE CIT (A), INSTEAD OF DISPOSING THE APPEAL ON MERITS HAS DISMI SSED THE APPEAL FOR NON-PAYMENT OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS NOT SUST AINABLE. ITA NO 1278 OF 2019 KAMAL PRASAD MAKADA HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 2 3. THE LEARNED DR WAS ALSO HEARD. 4. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS THAT THE PRO PERTIES WHICH ARE REFERRED TO BY THE AO ARE NOT THE PROPERT IES OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO TAX PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED ITS OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE C IT (A), WHO AT LEAST OUGHT TO HAVE VERIFIED THE SAID CONTENTION BE FORE HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE NOT PAID THE ADMITTED TAX. 5. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY IF THE PROPERTIES WHICH ARE ALLEGEDLY SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THE PROPERTIES OF THE BUILDER OR TO THE ASSESSEE. IF TH EY DO NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE, THEN THERE CANNOT BE ANY ASSESSMEN T OF THE CAPITAL GAINS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFO RE, FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF VERIFICATION, THE MATTER IS REMA NDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST NOVEMBER, 2019. SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 1 ST NOV. 2019. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 SRI KAMAL PRASAD MAKADA, C/O SHRI K.A. SAI PRASAD , FLAT NO.610, 6 TH FLOOR, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 500 001 2 ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1) HYDERABAD 3 CIT (A)-3 HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT 3 HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER