Ruchi Saraff, Hyderabad V. ITO,Ward 8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1504/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 150422514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KIRAN KATTA
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.1504/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 SMT. RUCHI SARAFF, HYDERABAD PAN ASCPS-3346-M VS. ITO, WARD 8 (2) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE MR. S. RAMA RAO FOR REVENUE MR. KIRAN KATTA DATE OF HEARING 17.07.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25.07.2014 ORDER PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDERS O F LD. CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD DATED 30.09.2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIV ING INCOME FROM TRADING IN SALARIES. SHE FILED RETURN O F INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 ON 17.11.2009, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,01,277/-. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSES SMENT, A.O. NOTICED THAT THERE WERE CASH CREDITS AND TRANS FER ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED. HE ALSO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS INVES TED AN AMOUNT OF RS.18,20,390/- IN PROPERTIES. SINCE THE D EPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS.90,34,000/- WERE CONSIDERED AS UNEXP LAINED, HE DID NOT MAKE ANY SEPARATE ADDITION OF INVESTMENT IN 2 ITA.NO.1504/HYD/2013 SMT. RUCHI SARAFF, HYDERABAD. PROPERTIES. ASSESSEE CONTESTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) THAT SHE WAS THE OWNER OF 373 SQ. YARDS OF LAND IN HYDERABAD AND CONSTRUCTED FLATS ON THE SAID PROPERTY AND ON COMPL ETION OF THE FLATS THE SAME WERE SOLD. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ADVAN CES RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR WERE TO THE TUNE OF RS.87, 06,750/- AND WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. THE DETAILS OF SUCH ADVANCES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE A.O. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND WERE AGAIN PROVIDED TO THE LD. CIT( A) DURING THE APPEAL. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF TH E ASSESSEE, LD. CIT(A) DIRECTED AS UNDER : 5.2. I HAVE SEEN CAREFULLY THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE, I HAVE ALSO SEEN THE LIST OF ADVANCES OR PAYMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR. I FIND THAT AMOUNTS HAVE INDEED BEEN RECE IVED DURING THE YEAR FROM VARIOUS PERSONS AS MENTIONED A BOVE. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO PRODUCED THE SALE DEEDS IN R ESPECT OF THESE FLATS, WHICH ALSO WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AS SESSING OFFICER AS PER THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ASCERTAIN IN WHICH YEAR THE CAPITAL GAI NS ARISE FROM THESE TRANSACTIONS. HE IS TO BRING THE CAPITAL GAINS TO TAX IN THE RELEVANT YEARS. 3. CONTESTING THE ABOVE, LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THA T ASSESSEE HAS CONTESTED THE ADDITION OF RS.90,34,000 /- AND FURNISHED NECESSARY EVIDENCES TO EXPLAIN THAT THE A BOVE WAS ADVANCES RECEIVED ON SALE OF FLATS WHICH WAS ACCEPT ED BY THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, LD.CIT(A) DID NOT DIRECT THE A .O. TO DELETE THE ADDITION WHEREAS, HE DIRECTED TO ASCERTAIN THE YEAR IN WHICH CAPITAL GAIN ARISES FROM THESE TRANSACTIONS. IT WAS ADMITTED THAT A.O. WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) EXCLUDED AMOUNT TO AN EXTENT OF RS. 87 LAKHS AND BA LANCE OF RS. 3 LAKHS WAS STILL CONFIRMED AS ASSESSEE DID NOT SELL SOME PROPERTY SO AS TO ADJUST THE ADVANCE. 4. LEARNED D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE WA S CLARIFIED BY THE A.O. VIDE LETTER DATED 25.04.2014. HE FAIRLY 3 ITA.NO.1504/HYD/2013 SMT. RUCHI SARAFF, HYDERABAD. ADMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT SHOWN AS ADVANCE FOR THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE OFFERED AS RECEIPTS FOR TH E A.Y. 2011- 2012 AND COPIES OF THE P & L ACCOUNT, SALE DEEDS IN RESPECT OF SALE OF FLATS INCLUDING UNDIVIDED PORTION OF THE LA ND WERE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES. IT WAS ALSO FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT VERIFYING AND RE-VERIFYING T HE FACTS OF THE CASE WOULD BE OF ACADEMIC INTEREST WITH NO TAX IMPLICATION. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PECULIAR ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) NEEDS MODIFICATION. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO DELETE THE ADDITIONS SO MADE IN THIS ASSESSMENT YEA R, SINCE THE AMOUNTS WERE ADMITTEDLY ADVANCES RECEIVED FOR SALE OF FLATS, THE RECEIPTS OF WHICH WERE ADMITTED IN LATER YEARS. ORDER OF CIT(A) TO THAT EXTENT STAND MODIFIED. GROUNDS OF TH E ASSESSEE ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.07.2014. SD/- SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 25 TH JULY, 2014 VBP/- COPY TO 1. M/S. KONAR GREENLANDS P. LTD., HILL COUNTY, BACHUPA LLY, MIYAPUR, HYDERABAD 500 072. C/O. SRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, H.NO.3-6-643, ST. NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 029. 2. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, 8 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A)-VII, HYDERABAD 4. CIT (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD 7. D.R. A BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD.