Sambanda Mudaliar Manivannan, CHENNAI V. ITO, Vellore

ITA 1772/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6004 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-08-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SATYANANARAYANAN
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Valuation report

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI , ! . , ' BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER , AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1772/MDS/2016 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SHRI SAMBANDA MUDALIAR MANIVANNAN, NO.161, THIRUVALLUVAR STREET, BELLIAPPA NAGAR, WALAJAPET, VELLORE-632 513. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(6), VELLORE. [PAN: AAOPM 9220 E ] ( & /APPELLANT) ( '(& /RESPONDENT) & ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.SATYANANARAYANAN, ADV. '(& ) /RESPONDENT BY : MR.ARV.SREENIVASAN, JCIT ) /DATE OF HEARING : 23.10.2017 ) /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.10.2017 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER : ITA NO.1772/MDS/2016 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S)-13, CHENNAI, IN ITA NO.224/CIT(A)-13/2011-12 DATED 29.02.2016 FOR T HE AY 2011-12. ITA NO.1772/MDS/2016 :- 2 -: 2. MR. ARV.SREENIVASAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND MR. S.SATYANANARAYANAN, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED A PIECE OF LAND IN 2004 AND HAD ENTERED INTO SALE AGR EEMENTS IN 2007 FOR THE SALE OF THE SAID LAND. THE SALE DEED WAS REGIS TERED ONLY IN 2010. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE AO HAD APPLIED PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES OBJECTIONS FOR REFERENCE TO THE DVO IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C(2) OF THE ACT. IT WAS A S UBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUES ARE RESTORE D TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER OBTAINING THE VALUATION R EPORT FROM THE DVO IN VIEW PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C(2) OF THE ACT. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD NO OBJ ECTION IF THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR THE PURPOSE OF VERIFICATION OF THE VALUATION WITH THE DVO IN LINE WITH SEC.50C(2) OF T HE ACT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE AO HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C( 2) OF THE ACT AND HAS NOT OBTAINED THE VALUATION REPORT FROM THE DVO, THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICAT ION AFTER COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C(2) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.1772/MDS/2016 :- 3 -: 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OCTOBER 23, 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: OCTOBER 23, 2017. TLN ) '23 43 /COPY TO: 1. & /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. '(& /RESPONDENT 5. 3 ' /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF