Gangadhar Ramrthi , Nizamabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Nizamabad

ITA 1501/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6627 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2021
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1501/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 GANGADHAR RAMARTHI, NIZAMABAD [PAN: AEXPR7645M] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : A.V.RAGHURAM, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI ROHIT MUJUMDAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 13-01-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-01-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY.2014-15 ARISES FROM TH E CIT(A)-5, HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 26-04-2018 PASSED IN CASE NO.0216/2017-18/CIT(A)-5, IN PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [IN SHORT, THE ACT]. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE PLEADED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL CHALLENGE CORRECTNESS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION INVOKING SECTION 50C OF THE ACT THERE BY ADDING THE ALLEGED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER OF THE RELEVANT CAPITAL ASSET; IN THE COURSE O F ASSESSMENT, AS UPHELD IN THE CIT(A)S LOWER APPELLA TE ORDER. ITA NO. 1501/HYD/2018 :- 2 -: 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAILS TO REBUT THE CLINCHING FACT AT THE OUTSET ITSELF THAT NEITHER OF THE LOW ER AUTHORITIES HAD MADE THE STATUTORY REFERENCE TO THE DVO U/S.50C(2) OF THE ACT. HE VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT NO SUCH REQUEST CAME FROM THE TAXPAYERS SIDE. WE FIND NO MER IT IN THE REVENUES INSTANT STAND. HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURTS DECISION SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL VS. CIT (2014) [372 IT R 83] (CAL) THAT A REFERENCE TO THE DVO IS MANDATORY IN SEC.5 0C PROCEEDINGS EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE CONCERNED DOES NOT R AISE ANY SUCH PRAYER. WE THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE INSTANT SOLE ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HI S AFRESH ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LI BERTY TO RAISE ALL FACTUAL AS WELL AS LEGAL PLEAS IN THE CONS EQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JANUARY, 2021 SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GO DARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED: 29-01-2021 TNMM ITA NO. 1501/HYD/2018 :- 3 -: COPY TO : 1.GANGADHAR RAMARTHI, C/O.C.SAI PRASAD, M.COM., LLB ., H.NO.5-6-64, DWARAKA NAGAR, NIZAMABAD. 2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-5, HYDERABAD. 4.PR.CIT-5, HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.