Ragam Lakshminarayana Yadav(HUF), RR Dist, Hyderabad V. Addl.C.I.T., Hyderabad

ITA 138/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53746 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K MYTHILI RANI
• Assessee Lawyers: DR C P RAMASWAMI
• Section: 54B; 54F

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I .T.A. NO. 138/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 RAGAM LAKSHMINARAYANA YADAV (HUF), SERLINGAMPALLY PAN: AALHR1228J VS. THE ADDL. CIT RANGE-8 HYDERABAD APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: DR. C.P. RAMASWAMI RESPONDENT BY: MS. K. MYTHILI RANI DATE OF HEARING: 31.10.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.10.2011 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD DATED 24.11.2010 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), INSOFAR AS IT I S PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE APPELLANT, IS AGAINST LAW, W EIGHT OF EVIDENCE AND PROBABILITIES OF THE CASE AND THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 2. A) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DEN IAL OF EXEMPTION U/S. 54F FOR A GROSS SUM OF RS. 1,87,25,8 75/-. HE OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED THE CLAIM BECAUSE THE REINVESTMENT WAS MADE IN THE NAMES OF COPARCENERS/FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE APPELLANT. B) THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE RE WAS AN ORAL PARTITION AND CONSEQUENTLY ALL THE FAMILY M EMBERS REINVESTED THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE AGRICULTURAL LA ND INTO RESIDENTIAL HOUSES IN THE NAMES OF THE COPARCENERS/ FAMILY MEMBERS. CONSEQUENTLY, HE ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT. C) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO A) AND B) ABOVE, IT IS PRAY ED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED AT LEAST PARTI AL RELIEF IN TERMS OF SECTION 54F IN RESPECT OF FIVE FLATS OU T OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FLATS PURCHASED IN THE NAMES OF FAM ILY MEMBERS. I.T.A. NO. 138/H/2011 RAGAM LAKSHMINARAYANA YADAV (HUF) ============================= 2 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DENIA L OF EXEMPTION U/S. 54B DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE REINVE STMENT IN AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS MADE IN THE NAME OF ONE OF TH E FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE APPELLANT HUF. HE OUGHT TO HAVE ALL OWED THE CLAIM. 4. FOR THE ABOVE GROUNDS AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THA T MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT PRAY S THAT THE APPEAL BE ALLOWED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED BY THE CIT(A) EX-PARTE AND HE PRAYED TH AT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY, TO PRESENT THE CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A), MAY BE PROVIDED. 4. THE LEARNED DR HAS NOT PUT ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION FO R THE SAME. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDE S, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS FAIR TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) AND REMIT BACK THE ENTIRE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A ) SHALL PROVIDE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE T HE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST OCTOBER, 2011. SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED THE 31 ST OCTOBER, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. RAGAM LAKSHIMNARAYANA YADAV (HUF), C/O. DR. C.P. RAMASWAMI, ADVOCATE, FLAT NOS. 102 & 303, GITANJALI APTS., PLOT NO. 108, SRINAGAR COLONY, HYDERABAD-500 073. 2. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-8, HYDERABAD. 3. THE CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD. 4. THE CIT-II, HYDERABAD. 5. THE DR B BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD TPRAO