ANIL HASMUKHLAL OZA, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 25(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 226/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1776 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Salary income; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 54F; 54; 139

Judgement Text

A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 226 /MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ANIL HASMUKHLAL OZA, FLAT NO. 13, BUILDING NO. 26-B, 4 TH FLOOR, GOVIND NAGAR CO.OP. HSG. SOC., SODAWALA LANE, BORIVALI (WEST), MUMBAI -400092. / V. THE ITO WARD 25(1(4), MUMBAI. ./ PAN : AAAPO1325Q ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI NITESH JOSHI REVENUE BY : SHRI ARUN KUMAR / DATE OF HEARING : 14-10-2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-12-2016 / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, BEING ITA NO. 226/MUM/2012, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 20 TH OCTOBER, 2011 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 35, M UMBAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A)), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09, THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ARISING FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFF ICER (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE AO) U/S 143(3) OF THE INC OME-TAX ACT,1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT). ITA 226/MUM/2012 2 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBA I (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE TRIBUNAL) READ AS UNDER:- 1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) ERRED IN DENYING EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS. 14,91,850/-. 2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS CONSIDERED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT U/S 54F WHILE TH E APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT. 3) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN STATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO SUBMIT THE EVIDE NCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOUSE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. 4) THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT ALL THE CONDITIONS U/S 54 EXCEPT THE DEPOSIT OF FUNDS IN A SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNT WAS COMPL IED WITH AND, THEREFORE, A LIBERAL VIEW BE TAKEN IN THE MATTER. 5) WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND IN ALTERNATE, THE APPELLANT S UBMITS THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUG HT TO HAVE ALLOWED EXEMPTION U/S 54 FOR AMOUNT INVESTED IN PURCH ASE OF PLOT OF LAND AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOUSE TILL DUE DATE OF F ILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM SALARY, CAPITAL GAINS AND INTEREST. TH E A.O. OBSERVED FROM AIR INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING TRANSACTIO N IN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR RS. 1,25,58,500/- ON 16.10.2007 ALONG WITH TWO OTHER PERSONS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD HIS SHARE IN A BUILDING FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 18,50,000/-THROUGH AGREEMENT DATED 15.10.200 7 . THE ASSESSEE COMPUTED THE CAPITAL GAIN ON HIS SHARE IN BUILDING OF RS. 14,91,000/- ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO SUBMIT COMPLETE DETAILS LIKE COPY OF AGREE MENT FOR SALE AND COPY OF ITA 226/MUM/2012 3 PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO THE SALE OF BUIL DING AND ALSO EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT CLAIMED BY T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD HIS PROPERTY A T ZAOBA WADI, GIRGAON, MUMBAI -400004 FOR RS.18,50,000/- AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE PU RCHASED PROPERTY AT NATIVE PLACE AT RAJASTHAN AND CONSTRUCTED A RESIDEN CE HOUSE. THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PUT THE UN-APPRO PRIATED AMOUNT OF CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF PROPERTY IN THE SPECIFIED CAPITAL G AIN ACCOUNT AS PER CAPITAL GAIN SCHEME ACCOUNT , AND INSTEAD THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN THE FIXED DEPOSIT ACCOUNT IN THE BANK AND HENCE CON DITIONS AS STIPULATED U/S 54 OF THE ACT WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH BY THE ASSESSEE . ON BEING ASKED BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A COPY OF LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,87,500/- FOR PURCHASE OF PRO PERTY IN RAJASTHAN ON 13.05.2008 , BUT FAILED TO FURNISH PROOF FOR CONSTR UCTION OF THE HOUSE WITHIN THE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS AND IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE AO THAT THE SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF CAPITAL GAIN WAS DEPOSITED IN THE FIXED DEPOSIT AND REMAINED IN THE FIXED DEPOSIT TILL 26 TH AUGUST, 2008 , WHEREAS THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT WAS 31 ST JULY, 2008. THUS, THE AO REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF T HE ACT AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEPOSIT THE UN-APPROPRIATED CAPITAL GAINS IN THE CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH THE BANK AS PER CAPITAL GAIN SCHEME BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME WITH THE REVENUE. THE AS SESSEE ALSO FAILED TO SUBMIT EVIDENCES OF HAVING SPENT THE AMOUNT ON CONSTRUCTIO N OF NEW HOUSE BEFORE THE AO. THUS, THE AO VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 3 0.11.2010 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E FOR EXEMPTION OF RS.14,91,850/- U/S 54 OF THE ACT. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.11.20 10 PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED FIRST APPEAL WITH THE LEARNED CIT(A). DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE T HE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE ITA 226/MUM/2012 4 SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF AMOUNT SPENT ON THE CONSTR UCTION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE, WHICH ARE AS UNDER:- (I) PURCHASE OF PLOT OF LAND RS. 1,87,500/- (II) AMOUNT SPENT ON CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE RS. 17,55,7 50/ - TOTAL RS. 19,43,250/- ============= THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTERVENING PERI OD, THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE OLD RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WERE KEPT IN A FIXED DEPO SIT WITH THE BANK AS THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TO UTILIZE THE SALE P ROCEEDS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL PREMISES . IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT KEEPING THE FUNDS IN THE INTERIM PERIOD IN THE FIXED DEPOSITS WITH THE BANK INSTEAD OF KEEPING IN A SEPARATE CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT WITH BANK AS PER CAPI TAL GAIN SCHEME IS JUST A TECHNICAL OMISSION . IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SPIRIT O F LAW TO KEPT THE MONEY SEPARATELY FOR CONSTRUCTION WAS FULLY FOLLOWED AS T HE ASSESSEE KEPT THE AMOUNT IN BANK IN FIXED DEPOSIT. IN SUPPORT, THE AS SESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F BAJAJ TEMPO LTD. V. CIT (1992) REPORTED IN 196 ITR 380(BOM.) , WHEREBY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER:- ' THE PROVISION IN A TAXING STATUTE GRANTING INCENT IVES FOR PROMOTING GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE CONSTRUED LIBERALL Y AND SINCE THE PROVISION FOR PROMOTING ECONOMIC GROWTH HAS TO BE INTERPRETED LIBERALLY RESTRICTIONS ON IT TOO HAS TO BE CONSTRUE D SO AS TO ADVANCE THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PROVISIONS AND NOT TO FRUSTRAT E IT' IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.17,55 ,750/- WAS UTILIZED AS ON 12 TH MARCH, 2009 AND HENCE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE OUT OF CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.18,50,000/- , THE ASSESSEE DID UTILIZED RS.17.55 LACS WITHIN THREE YEARS , ITA 226/MUM/2012 5 THE EXEMPTION SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF PERTAINING TO HIS SHARE IN THE PROPERTY. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MERE LY SUBMITTED A COPY OF LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.1 ,87,500/- ON 13 TH MAY, 2008 BUT FAILED TO FURNISH ANY PROOF FOR CONSTRUCTI ON WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS BEFORE THE AO. THE LD. CIT(A) REFERRED TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 54F OF THE ACT AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FAILED TO RE-INVEST THE NET CONSIDERATION AMOUNT SIMULTANEOUSLY OR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEPOSITED THE SAME WITH THE CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT M AINTAINED WITH THE BANK BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME U /S 139(1) OF THE ACT AS PER CAPITAL GAIN SCHEME. IT WAS HELD THAT AS THE SUBSTA NTIAL PORTION OF CAPITAL GAIN WAS PUT IN FIXED DEPOSIT AND IT REMAINED IN THE FIX ED DEPOSIT TILL 26 TH AUGUST, 2008 ( AS THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF RETURN WAS 31 ST JULY, 2008) , THE ASSESSEE WAS BOUND TO COMPLY THE PROVISIONS OF SUB SECTION 4 OF SECTON 54 AND DEPOSIT THE AMOUNT AS PER THE CAPITAL GAINS ACCOUNTS SCHEME , 1988-GSR 724(E), DATED 22-6-1988 AND DEPOSIT THE AMOUNT IN THE ACCOU NT WITHIN THE LIST OF AUTHORISED BRANCHES OF THE BANKS SPECIFIED TO RECEI VE DEPOSITS AND MAINTAIN ACCOUNTS-GSR 725(E), DATED 22-6-1988, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DO SO DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD I.E. DURING THE INTERVEN ING PERIOD FROM THE DATE OF SALE OF FIRST HOUSE AND THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF T HE NEW HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN, HENCE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY LEARN ED CIT(A) VIDE APPELLATE ORDERS DATED 20-10-2011. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) DATED 20-10-2011 ,THE ASSESSEE FILED SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN ITS VERY RECENT DECISI ON IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN MERCHANT V. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX, (2016) 73 ITA 226/MUM/2012 6 TAXMANN.COM 2 (BOMBAY) HAS HELD THAT EXEMPTION U/S 54F SHALL BE ALLOWED IF THE SAME IS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTIO N OF NEW HOUSE BEFORE THE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN U/S 139 OF THE ACT OR THE SAME HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE NOTIFIED CAPITAL GAIN BANK ACCOUNT BEFORE THE D ATE OF FILING OF RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT, THE EXEMPTION SHALL BE ALLOWED. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS JOINT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY , WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE SHARE IN PROPERTY WAS SOLD ON 15 TH OCTOBER, 2007 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 18,50,000/- WHEREIN CAPITAL GAIN EARNED WAS RS. 14, 91,000/- WHICH IS NOT A DISPUTED POSITION. THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETUR N WAS 31 ST JULY, 2008 WHILE THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS ACTUALLY FILED ON 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2008. THUS, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DEPOSIT ED THE AMOUNT IN THE NOTIFIED CAPITAL GAIN BANK ACCOUNT BEFORE 31 ST JULY, 2008 I.E. DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT , BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD INVESTED THE AMOUNT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE BEFOR E FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2008 I.E. WITHIN TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 139 OF THE ACT, OF WHICH THE DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION ARE FILED VIDE PAPER BOOK PAGE NO. 59 TO 60. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D INVESTED THE SALE PROCEED OF THE PROPERTY SOLD IN THE FIXED DEPOSIT W ITH THE BANKS WHICH WERE LATER UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE PURCHASE OF L AND AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE DEC ISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN ME RCHANT (SUPRA) IS DIRECTLY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THE AMOUNT SPENT ON CONST RUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN TILL THE DATE OF FIL ING OF RETURN OF INCOME ON 18- 11-2008. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WOR KED OUT THE CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 14.91 LACS WHILE THE INVESTMENT MADE IN THE CON STRUCTION OF NEW HOUSE PROPERTY IS RS. 1.87 LACS FOR THE PLOT , AND RS. 17 .86 LACS AS PER CHART UPTO 02-05-2009 TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN AND THE AMOUNT SPENT TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDE NTIAL HOUSE TILL THE DATE ITA 226/MUM/2012 7 OF FILING OF RETURN ON 18.11.2008 SHOULD BE ALLOWED AND THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT. 7. THE LD. D.R. FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ORDER OF T HE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN MERCHANT (SUPR A) IS BINDING ON THE REVENUE AND EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT WILL BE ALL OWED FOR THE AMOUNT SPENT ON CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN TI LL THE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE ON 18.11.2008 WHIC H IS WITHIN TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED U/S 139 OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THA T THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR COMPUTING THE AM OUNT OF EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH AFORESAID JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYU N SULEMAN MERCHANT (SUPRA), AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBMITTED ANY EVID ENCE OF CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE BEFORE THE AO AND ALSO LEARNE D CIT(A) REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AT THRESHOLD ON THE GROUNDS T HAT THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE HOUSE WERE NOT DEPOSITED IN NOTIFIED CAPITAL GA IN ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH BANK . 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ALS O PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON. WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSE IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WHICH WAS JOINTLY OWNED AND THE ASSESSEE SOLD HIS SHARE OF THE PROPERTY ON 15 TH OCTOBER, 2007 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 18.50 LACS. THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 14.91 LACS ON THE SALE OF THE SAID PROPERTY WHICH I S NOT A DISPUTED POSITION BETWEEN RIVAL PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED THE PROCEED OF THE SALE OF THE AFORE-STATED PROPERTY IN THE FIXED DEPOSIT WITH BANK INSTEAD OF DEPOSITING IN THE NOTIFIED CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WIT H THE BANK AS PER THE CAPITAL GAIN SCHEME BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING O F RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT IE. 31 ST JULY, 2008. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ALSO FILE RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT I.E. 31 ST JULY, 2008 , RATHER THE ITA 226/MUM/2012 8 ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2008 WHICH WAS ALBEIT FILED WITHIN TIME STIPULATED U/S 139 OF THE ACT. THE ASS ESSEE HAS ACQUIRED THE LAND IN RAJASTHAN FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1.87 L ACS AND COST OF CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IS CLAIMED AT RS. 17,86,49 0/- TILL 02-05-2009 AS PER PAPER BOOK/PAGE 59-60 FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WH ICH CONTAINS THE GENERAL DETAILS OF VARIOUS EXPENSES INCURRED FOR THE CONSTR UCTION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE . THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED AT THRESHOLD BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEPOSIT THE SALE PROCEED OF THE PROPERTY SOLD IN THE NOTIFIED CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH THE BANK AS PER CAPITAL GAIN SCHEME AS ALSO THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE NECESSARY EVIDENCES TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AT RA JASTHAN. WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN MERCHANT (SUPRA)IS DIR ECTLY APPLICABLE AND ASSESSEE WILL BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE AMOUNT UTILIZED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDEN TIAL HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN TILL THE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME ON 18.11.200 8 WHICH WAS FILED WITHIN TIME STIPULATED U/S 139 OF THE ACT. IN THE INTERES T OF JUSTICE KEEPING IN VIEW FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, THIS MATTER NEE DS TO BE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION AS TO THE AMOUNT OF EXEMPTION WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 54 OF THE ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RATIO OF DECISION LA ID DOWN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN ME RCHANT (SUPRA) AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, BY THE AO AFTER VERIFICATIO N OF THE EVIDENCES . NEEDLESS TO SAY THE A.O. SHALL PROVIDE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES O F NATURAL JUSTICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PRODUCE NECESSARY EVIDENCES AND EXPLANATIONS BEFORE THE A.O. IN ITS D EFENSE WHICH SHALL BE ADMITTED BY THE A.O. FOR EXAMINATION AND VERIFICATI ON OF THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE PURCHASE/CONSTRUCTI ON OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AT RAJASTHAN ON MERITS THAT THE AMOUNT HAVE B EEN GENUINELY AND ITA 226/MUM/2012 9 BONAFIDELY SPENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW RE SIDENTIAL FLAT AT RAJASTHAN. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 226/MUM/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH DECEMBER, 2016. # $% &' 08-12-2016 ( ) SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ MUMBAI ; & DATED 08-12-2016 [ .9../ R.K. R.K. R.K. R.K. , EX. SR. PS !'#$%&%# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. : ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. : / CIT- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. =>( 99?@ , ?@ , $ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI A BENCH 6. (BC D / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, = 9 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ / ITAT, MUMBAI