Ali Mohammed, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation)-1, Hyderabad

ITA 2098/Hyd/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3397 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment
• Section: 13; 54

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2098/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 ALI MOHAMMED, HYDERABAD [PAN: AKDPM8434D] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 28-04-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-06-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY.2012-13 ARISES FROM TH E CIT(A)-10, HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 31-08-2016 PASSED IN CASE NO.0029/CIT(A)-10/2015-16, IN PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [IN SHORT, THE ACT]. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE SOLE SUBSTA NTIVE ISSUE THAT REQUIRES OUR APT ADJUDICATION IS THAT OF CORRE CTNESS OF BOTH THE LEARNER LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION DISALLOWIN G ASSESSEES SECTION 54 DEDUCTION CLAIM OF RS.44,20,00 0/. BOTH THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR THE IMPUGNED DEDUCTION IN VIEW OF THE CLIN CHING FACT THAT HE HAD ACQUIRED/PURCHASED THE CORRESPONDING ITA NO. 2098/HYD/2017 :- 2 -: RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN NEW YORK, USA THAN IN INDIA AND THEREFORE, SECTION 54 IS NOT ALLOWABLE IN HIS CASE. 3. WE NOTICE IN THIS FACTUAL BACKDROP THAT THE LEARNER L OWER AUTHORITIES AND MORE PARTICULARLY, THE CIT(A)S DETAILE D DISCUSSION IN PARA 6.1 TO THIS EFFECT HAS PLACED RELI ANCE ON THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT IN SECTION 54 VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2 014 THAT THE IMPUGNED DEDUCTION IS ADMISSIBLE IN CASE OF P URCHASE OF A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IN INDIA ONLY. 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAILS TO DISPUTE TH AT THE ABOVE STATED AMENDMENT VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2014 IS APPLICABLE W.E.F.01-04-2015 ONLY WHEREAS WE ARE IN AY.2012- 13 AND THEREFORE, THE SAME OUGHT NOT TO BE HELD AS CARRY ING RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT. THIS TRIBUNALS CO-ORDINATE BENCH S DECISIONS IN VINAY MISHRA VS. ACIT [141 ITD 301] (B ANG) AND MS.PREMA P.SHAH VS. ITO [100 ITD 60] HOLD IN PRE- AMENDMENT ERA THAT SUCH A RE-INVESTMENT OF CAPITAL GAIN S IN A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OUTSIDE INDIA IS VERY MUCH ENTITL ED FOR THE IMPUGNED SECTION 54 RELIEF. WE THUS REVERSE THE LEARN ED LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION DISALLOWING ASSESSEES SECTION 54 DEDUCTION CLAIM OF RS.44.20 LAKHS FOR THIS PRECISE REASON ALON E. NO OTHER ARGUMENT HAS BEEN PRESSED BEFORE US. 5. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH JUNE, 2021 SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.G ODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED: 11-06-2021 TNMM ITA NO. 2098/HYD/2017 :- 3 -: COPY TO : 1.ALI MOHAMMED, C/O. K. VASANT KUMAR, A.V. RAGHU RA M, P. VINOD & M. NEELIMA DEVI, ADVOCATES, 610, BABUKHA N ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD. 2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-I, HYDERABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-10, HYDERABAD. 4.CIT-(IT & TP), HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.