Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Cir- 1(1), Panaji., Panaji V. Mr. Tulio De Noronha Desouza, Panaji

ITA 193/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1429 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K M MAHESH LD
• Assessee Lawyers: ATUL JOSHI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 19 3 /PNJ/2015 : (A.Y 201 2 - 1 3 ) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. M R . TULIO DE NORONHA DESOUZA 404, CITI CENTRE, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : A BTPD0872B ITA NO. 194/PNJ/2015 : (A.Y 2012 - 13) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. SMT. TANYA SUZANE DE SOUZA 404, CITI CENTRE, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : A BTPD087 1C CO NO. 59/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NO. 193/PNJ/2015 ) : (A.Y 2012 - 13) M R . TULIO DE NORONHA DESOUZA 404, CITI CENTRE, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : A BTPD0872B VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) CO NO. 60/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NO. 194/PNJ/2015 ) : (A.Y 2012 - 13) SMT. TANYA SUZANE DE SOUZA 404, CITI CENTRE, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : A BTPD0871C VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE S BY : ATUL JOSHI , CA REVENUE BY : K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12/08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/08/2015 2 ITA NOS. 193 & 194/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 59 & 60/PNJ/2015 (A.Y : 2012 - 13) O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : 1. ITA NO. 193/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MR. TULIO DE NORONHA DESOUZA AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PANAJI - 1 IN ITA NO. 209/PNJ/14 - 15 DT. 13.2.2015 FOR THE A.Y 2012 - 13 AND CO NO. 59/PNJ/2015 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 193/PNJ/2015. ITA NO. 194/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF SMT. TANYA SUZANE DE SOUZA AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PANAJI - 1 IN ITA NO. 210/PNJ/14 - 15 DT. 13.2.2015 FOR THE A.Y 2012 - 13 AND CO NO. 60/PNJ/2015 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 194/PNJ/2015. 2. AS THE APPEALS RELATE TO HUSBAND AND WIFE TO WHOM THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 5A OF THE ACT APPLY, AND AS THE ISSUES ARE IDENTICAL, BOTH THE REVENUES APPEALS AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. SHRI ATUL JOSHI, CA REPRESENTED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEES AND SHRI K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE REVENUES APPEALS, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN BOTH THE APPEALS : 1) THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW AND FACTS OF TH E CASE. 2) THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXCEEDED THE LIMIT BY CLAIMING EXEMPTION AMOUNTING TO RS.98,81,563/ - WHICH ITSELF IS DEFEATING THE INTENTION OF LEGISLATION AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 54EC(1) AS PROVIDED BY THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF ITAT JAIPUR BENCH VIDE ITA NO. 648/JP/20 11 F OR A.Y. 2008 - 09, DT. 31 - 01 - 2012 AND IN THE CASE OF 3 ITA NOS. 193 & 194/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 59 & 60/PNJ/2015 (A.Y : 2012 - 13) ACIT, CIRLCE - 2, AJMER VS SHRI. RAJ KUMAR JA IN & SONS (HUF) 2012 - TIOL - 1 79 - ITAT - JAIPUR. 3) FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) MAY BE SET A SIDE AND ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER RESTORED. 4) THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT THE ISSUE WAS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION AMOUNTING TO RS. 98,81,563/ - U/S 54EC OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 54EC THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO ONLY RS. 50 LACS DEDUCTION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 5. IN REPLY, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE WAS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MS. RANIA FALEIRO IN ITA NO. 9/PNJ/2013 DT.18.4.2013 AND THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF MS. SHANTABAI V. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 10/PNJ/2013 DT. 28.6.2013 AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C.JAICHANDER IN T AX C ASE APPEAL NOS.419 AND 533 OF 2014 DT. 15.9.2014 WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COUR T HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS : 10. THE LEGISLATURE HAS CHOSEN TO REMOVE THE AMBIGUITY IN THE PROVISO TO SECTION 54EC( 1) OF THE ACT BY INSERTING A SECOND PROVISO WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2015. THE MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVISIONS IN THE FINANCE (NO.2) BILL, 2014 ALSO STATES THAT THE SAME WILL BE APPLICABLE FROM 1.4.2015 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 AND THE SUBS EQUENT YEARS. THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE PROBABLY APPEARS TO BE THAT THIS AMENDMENT SHOULD BE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 2016 TO AVOID UNWANTED LITIGATIONS OF THE PREVIOUS YEARS. EVEN OTHERWISE, WE DO NOT WISH TO READ ANYTHING MORE INTO THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 54EC(1) OF THE ACT, AS IT STOOD IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSEES. 11. IN ANY EVENT, FROM A READING OF SECTION 54EC(1) AND THE FIRST PROVISO, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE TIME LIMIT FOR INVESTMENT IS SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF TRANSFER AND 4 ITA NOS. 193 & 194/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 59 & 60/PNJ/2015 (A.Y : 2012 - 13) EVEN IF SUCH INVESTMENT FALLS UNDER TWO FINANCIAL YEARS, THE BENEFIT CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DENIED. IT WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE, IF THE RESTRICTION ON THE INVESTMENT IN BONDS TO RS.50,00,000/ - IS INCORPORATED IN SECTION 54EC(1) OF THE ACT ITSELF . HOWEVER, THE AMBIGUITY HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE LEGISLATURE WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2015 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 AND THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MS. RANIA FALEIRO AND MS. SHANTABAI V. KAMAT AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C.JAICHANDER REFERRED TO SUPRA , AND AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CI T(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE HAVE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. 7. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). AS WE HAVE ALREADY UPHELD THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES STAND DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES STAND DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12/08/2015. S D / - (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S D / - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 12/08/ 201 5 *SSL* 5 ITA NOS. 193 & 194/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 59 & 60/PNJ/2015 (A.Y : 2012 - 13) COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT S (I) MR. TULIO DE NORONHA DESOUZA & (II) SMT. TANYA SUZANE DE SOUZA (3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER , 6 ITA NOS. 193 & 194/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 59 & 60/PNJ/2015 (A.Y : 2012 - 13) DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ORDER ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 12/08/2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 1 3 /08/2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 1 3 /08/2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 1 3 /08/2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 1 3 /08/2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12/08/2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 1 3 /08/2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER