Duddukunta Sreedhar Reddy, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Central Circle-6, Hyderabad, Hyderguda Village

ITA 184/HYD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7014 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V S T SAI
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 132

Judgement Text

ITA NOS 170 171 182 AND 183 DUDDUKUNTA SREEDHAR RED DY HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.170, 171, 182 & 183, 184 & 185/HYD/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 2010-11 & 2011-12 SHRI DUDDUKUNTA SREEDHAR REDDY, HYDERABAD PAN: AHSPD0865H VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI S. RAMA RAO REVENUE BY : SRI Y.V.S.T. SAI, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING: 01/08/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29/10/2019 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THESE ARE ALL ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR THE A.YS 2006- 07, 2007-08, 2008-09 AND 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY, AGAINST THE COMMON AND CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-11,HYDERABAD, DATED 09.09.2016. THE COMMON ISSUE IN ALL THESE APPEALS F OR THE A.Y 2006-07 TO 2009-10 IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF I NTEREST REPRESENTING 1/3 RD INTEREST ON LOANS OBTAINED FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK. A.Y 2006-07 2. BRIEF FACTS ON THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THERE WAS A S EARCH AND SEIZURE U/S 132 OF THE I.T. ACT ON 30.11.2011 A ND CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A WAS ITA NOS 170 171 182 AND 183 DUDDUKUNTA SREEDHAR RED DY HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 12 COMPLETED. DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT ON THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPER TY, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED INTEREST OF RS.1,50,000/-PAID ON HOUSING LOAN IN THE COMPUTATION STATEMENT, BUT HAS NOT PROD UCED THE BANK STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF LOAN AVAILED AND PAYME NT OF INTEREST. HE THEREFORE, DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF INT EREST FOR ALL THE RELEVANT A.YS. ON APPEAL, THE CIT (A) CONSIDERED TH E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF COPIE S OF CERTIFICATES DATED 20.08.2007 BY INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, R.P. ROAD , SECUNDERABAD FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2005-06 AND 20 06-07, VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 5.5.2008 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2 007-08, VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 20.07.2009 FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 200 8-09, WHEREIN THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST ON HOUSING LOAN BY THE ASSE SSEE WAS CONFIRMED. A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO WAS CALLED F OR WHO SUBMITTED THAT THE LOAN WAS AVAILED BY THREE PERSON S I.E THE ASSESSEE, HIS WIFE SMT.D.APARNA REDDY AND HIS BROTH ER SHRI D. SRINIVAS REDDY AND SINCE THE SHARE OF EACH PERSONS WAS EVIDENCED FROM THE CERTIFICATES, THE AO SUGGESTED T O DISALLOW EQUALLY FROM ON EACH OF THE ASSESSEES SHARES OF IN TEREST. IN REBUTTAL, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ENTIRE LOAN TAKEN FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK WAS UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE F OR PURCHASE OF A HOUSE AND THEREFORE, INTEREST AMOUNT IS ALLOWABLE FROM THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY. THE CIT (A) HOWEVER, O BSERVED THAT THE LOAN WAS A HOUSING LOAN AVAILED BY THREE PERSON S. THEREFORE, HE DIRECTED THE AO TO ALLOW ONLY 1/3 RD OF THE INTEREST PAID AS BEING THE ASSESSEES SHARE OF INTEREST. THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE LOAN WAS TAKEN B Y THREE PERSONS, THE ENTIRE LOAN WAS UTILIZED IN CONSTRUCTI ON OF THE HOUSE PROPERTY BY TWO PEOPLE ONLY, I.E.THE ASSESSEE AND H IS WIFE AT PLOT NO.301, GR ELITE, ROAD NO.14, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERA BAD, AND SINCE HE WAS OFFERING THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERT Y IN HIS