Sureka Auto Private Limited, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-3(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 1829/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5932 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SITARAMA RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Condonation of delay
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

ITA NO 1829 OF 2014 S UREKHA AUTO PRIVATE LTD HYDERABAD PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1829/HYD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) M/S. SUREKHA AUTO PVT LTD HYDERABAD PAN: AAHCS 2610 N VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2) HYDERABAD FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI S. RAMA RAO FOR REVENUE : SHRI A. SITARAMA RAO, DR O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2006-07. IN TH IS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF T HE CIT (A)-IV, HYDERABAD, DATED 8 TH JANUARY, 2010 HOLDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C WOULD APPLY TO THE COMPUTATION OF CAPIT AL GAINS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS SEEN THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 236 DAYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. T HE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONG WITH AN AFFIDAVIT. IT IS STATED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT ( A) DATED 10.01.2014 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL ON 10.02.2014. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLOSED ITS BUSINESS ACTIVITY DATE OF HEARING : 30.11.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.12.2016 ITA NO 1829 OF 2014 S UREKHA AUTO PRIVATE LTD HYDERABAD PAGE 2 OF 3 DURING THE YEAR 2006 AND THE COVERS SENT TO THE ASS ESSEES ADDRESS AT NEW BOIGUDA, SECUNDERABAD, WAS NOT DIREC TLY RECEIVED BY IT AND THEREFORE, THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL BY THE HON'BLE CIT (A) HAS COME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY DURING THE LAST WEEK OF NOVEMBER, 2014 RESULTING IN THE DELAY OF 23 6 DAYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. IT IS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DELAY IS FOR THE REASONS WHICH ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE AND IS NOT INTENTIONAL. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED T HE REASONS GIVEN IN THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DE LAY, WHILE THE LEARNED DR OPPOSED THE CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN PROPER REASONS FOR THE DELAY . 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT THE REASON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY IS THAT IT HAS CLOSED ITS BUSINESS AND THEREFORE, THE COVERS SENT TO THE ASSE SSEES ADDRESS ARE NOT DIRECTLY RECEIVED BY IT AND THEREFORE, THER E IS A DELAY. HOWEVER, IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, IT IS STATED THAT THE APPELLATE ORDER WAS SERVED ON TO THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL ON 10 .02.2014 WHICH ITSELF SHOWS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) HA S BEEN LEGALLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEES C ONTENTION THAT IT WAS NOT SERVED WITH THE ORDER IS CONTRARY TO ITS CONTENTION THAT THE SAME WAS SERVED ON ITS COUNSEL AND THEREFORE, I S NOT SUSTAINABLE. THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO COND ONE THE DELAY AND THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS THEREFORE, DISMISSED I N LIMINE. ITA NO 1829 OF 2014 S UREKHA AUTO PRIVATE LTD HYDERABAD PAGE 3 OF 3 5. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST DECEMBER, 2016. SD/- SD/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 21 ST DECEMBER, 2016. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 SHRI S.RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYA'S E LEGANCE, 3-6- 643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500029 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2) IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS , HYDERABAD 3 CIT (A)-IV HYDERABAD 4 CIT III HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER