Abdul Mannan, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Hyderabad

ITA 2017/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7026 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILANJAY DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: T CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Set aside; Capital Gains
• Section: 50C; 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO 2017 OF 2018 ABDUL MANNAN HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B SMC BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2017/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI ABDUL MANNAN HYDERABAD PAN:ANZPA6485B VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(3) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI T. CHAITANYA KUMAR REVENUE BY : SRI NILANJAY DEY, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING: 31/10/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/11/2019 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2010-11 AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-3, HYDERABAD, DATED 18.6.2 018. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND HAD SOLD A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SITUA TED AT DOOR NO.19-2-317/D/11/A, NEW MALLEPALLY, HYDERABAD VIDE DOCUMENT NO.3877 OF 2009 ON 3.12.2009 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.8,25,000/-. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE SRO VALUE OF THE PROPERTY WAS RS.10,24,900/-. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILE D THE RETURN OF INCOME REFLECTING THE ABOVE TRANSACTION AND OFFERIN G THE CAPITAL GAIN DERIVED THEREFROM, THE CASE WAS REOPENED U/S 1 47 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR AND DID NOT FILE ANY DETAILS, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 BY ADOPTING THE SR O VALUE OF RS.10,24,900/- AS THE SALE CONSIDERATION U/S 50C OF THE I.T. ACT AND THE CAPITAL GAINS WAS BROUGHT TO TAX. AGGRIEVED , THE ASSESSEE ITA NO 2017 OF 2018 ABDUL MANNAN HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 3 FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A) CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF THE RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO THE MERITS OF THE A DDITION. NONE APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT (A) ALSO ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HOWEVER, CONFIRMED THE VALIDITY OF THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 AND REMANDED THE ISSUE ON MERITS TO THE FIL E OF THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE ME. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF REOPENING ALSO MAY BE SET ASID E TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RECONSIDERATION. 3. THE LEARNED DR HOWEVER, OPPOSED THE REMAND TO TH E AO. 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, I FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED EX-PARTE U/S 144 BY THE AO AND EVEN BEFORE THE CIT (A), NONE APP EARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT (A) HAS CONFIRMED THE VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE U/S 148. SINCE HE HAS ALREADY SET ASIDE THE ISSUE ON ME RITS TO THE FILE OF THE AO, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT (A) OUG HT TO HAVE REMANDED THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE U/S 14 8 ALSO TO THE FILE OF THE AO. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, I AM INCLINED TO SE T ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE BOTH ON THE VALIDITY O F THE RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS MERITS OF THE ADD ITIONS U/S 50C AFRESH. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO 2017 OF 2018 ABDUL MANNAN HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST NOV. 2019. SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 1 ST NOV. 2019. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 SHRI ABDUL MANNAN, C/O SHRI T. CHAITANYA KUMAR, A DVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, GOURI APARTMENT, URDU LANE, HIMAYATNAG AR, HYDERABAD 2 ITO WARD 7(3) HYDERABAD 3 CIT (A)-3 HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT 3 HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER