Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ,Central Circle-3(1) , Hyderabad V. Goruganti Damodar Rao, Nalgonda

ITA 231/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4584 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V S T SAI
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 153C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 231 /H YD /20 21 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 09 - 10 THE A CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 ( 1 ) HYDERABAD VS. SRI GORUGANTI DAMODAR RAO NALGONDA [PAN: BCCPG4043G] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY: SRI YVST SAI, DR ASSESSEE BY: SHRI A.V. RAGHU RAM DATE OF HEARING: 1 3 /0 9 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 /0 9 /2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA , J .M.: THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CIT(A) - 12 , HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 29 / 03 /20 21 IN CASE NO. 10151/2019 - 20 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [IN SHORT THE ACT] . HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. IT TRANSPIRES DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT REVENUES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE RAISED IN THE INSTANT APPE AL SEEKS TO REVERSE CIT(A)S ACTION QUASHING SEC.153C ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS NOT BASED ON VALID SATISFACTION. THERE IS HARDLY ANY DISPUTE THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH A SEARCH DATED 11.3.2010 FOLLOWED BY SEC.153C S ATISFACTION N OTE DATED 11.11.2011 MAKING CAPITAL GAINS ADDITION OF RS. 22,87,67,420/ - . THE CIT(A)S DETAILED DISCUSSION QUASHING IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT FOR WANT OF A PROPER SATISFACTION NOTE, READS AS UNDER. 7.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A O IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS BEING LEGAL IN NATURE ARE ADMITTED AND TAKE N COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET RECORDED BY ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 2 ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 3 ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 4 ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 5 ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 6 ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 7 3. WE FIND NO MERIT IN REVENUES INSTANT SOLE SUBSTANTIVE LEGAL ARGUMENT FOR THE PRECISE REASON THAT THE CORRESPONDING STATUTORY PROVISION I.E. SEC. 153C [ AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH ON 11.3.2010 ] AS WELL AS THE SATISFACTION NOTE DATED 11.11.2011 AND THE CO RRESPONDING MATERIAL; FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IS BELONGS OR BELONG TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SEC . 153A, WHEREAS THE A SSESSING OFFICERS SATISFACTION NOTE HEREIN HAD ONLY RECORDED THAT THE SAME RELATES TO SRI G ORUGANTI DAMODAR RAO (THE ASSESSEE). WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT VIDE THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 WEF 1.6.2000 ONLY STIPULATE THAT THE IMPUGNED STATUTORY PROVISION COMES INTO PLAY EVEN IN CASE THE SPECIFIED MATERIAL; FOUND OR SEIZED DURIN G THE SEARCH ALSO PERTAIN OR PERTAINS TO OR RELATES TO . T HE A SSESSING OFFICER HEREINABOVE CLEARLY FELL INTO ERROR IN NOT ARRIVING AT THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER THEREFORE . 4. LD.CIT - DRS NEXT VEHEMENT CONTENTION DURING THE C OURSE OF HEARING IS THAT ALL THE FOREGOING STATUTORY EXPRESSIONS CARRY ONE AND THE SAME IMPLICATION, ALTHOUGH THE GRAMMATICAL EXPRESSION EMPLOYED HEREIN MAY VARY FROM CASE TO CASE. WE SEE NO REASON IN THE R EVENUES INSTANT ARGUMENTS IN ITA NO. 231/HYD/2021 AY: 2009 - 10 8 LIGHT OF HONBLE A PEX COURTS LANDMARK JUDGEMENT IN CWT VS. B. CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) AND LATE NAWAB SIR MIR OSMAN ALI KHAN (1986) 162 ITR 888 (SC) THAT THE CLINCHING EXPRESSION BELONGS CARRIES THE RIGHTFUL SENSE OF OWNERSHIP. WE THEREFORE ADOPT STRICTER INTERPRETATION AS PER THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VS DILIP K UMAR & CO, (2018) 9 SC C 1 (FB) (SC) AND HOLD THAT A S THE A SSESSING OFFICERS IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT IS NOT BASED ON A VALID SATISFACTION NOTE AND THEREFORE , THE CIT(A)S ORDER QUASHING THE SAME DESERVES TO BE UPHELD. ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DT. 29 .0 9 .2021. * GMV COPY TO : 1. A CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 ( 1 ), HYDERABAD 2. SRI GORUGANTI DAMODAR RAO, 1 - 8 - 84/5/A1, BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR, SURYAPET, NALGONDA (DIST) 508 213, TELANGANA 3. ACIT, CENTRAL RANGE - 3, HYD. 4 . CIT(A) - 12, HYDERABAD. 5 . PR. CIT (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD. 6 . DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 7 . GUARD FILE.