Baderunisa Begum, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

ITA 250/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9453 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROHIT MUZUMDAR
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 250; 201; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENC E ) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 250 /HYD./ 201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 09 - 10 MRS. BADERUNISA BEGUM VS. ITO, WARD 7 (1) HYDERABAD HYDERABAD [ PAN: BANPB8149R ] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : S MT. S. SANDHYA, A.R. FOR REVENUE : SH. ROHIT MUZUMDAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 03/03/ 202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 /03 /202 1 O R D E R PER P. MADHAVI DEVI, JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 3 , HYDERABAD DATED 04.09.2017 RELATING TO A.Y. 20 09 - 10 . HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. ITA NO . 250 /HYD./ 201 8 AY 20 09 - 10 MRS. BADERUNISA BEGUM , HYD. 2 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE , AN INDIVIDUAL , HAD TRANSFERRED AN IMMO VABLE PROPERTY VIDE REGD. DOC. NO. 3165/08 DATED 12.08.2008 WITH A MARKET VALUE OF RS. 83,10,000/ - . SINCE ASSESSE HAS NOT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME, NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 30.03.2016 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE , ASSESSEES SON APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FILED INFORMATION CALLED FOR. FOR COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAIN , THE AO APPLIED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50 C OF THE ACT AND AFTER DEDUCTING PROPORTIONATE COST OF ACQU ISITION AND TH E HOLDING PERIOD BEING LESS THAN THREE YEARS , HE TREATED THE SAME AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND BROUGHT IT TO TAX. AGGRIEVED , ASSESSE E FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO . THEREFORE, ASSESSE E IS IN S ECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN INITIATING PROCEEDINGS UL S 148 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE LAND ADMEASURING 550 SQ. YARDS WAS TRANSFERRED TO MOHD. PERVEZ SAJJAD, SON OF THE APP ELLANT FOR A SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.25 LAKHS. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN AD OPTING THE SALE CONSIDERATION AT RS. 83,10,000/ - BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 5 OC OF THE LT. ACT. ITA NO . 250 /HYD./ 201 8 AY 20 09 - 10 MRS. BADERUNISA BEGUM , HYD. 3 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED THE AMOUNT WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE VALUATION CELL. 6. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2.1. WHILE REITERATING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW , LD.COUNSEL FOR ASSEESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF SALE DEED AND ALSO ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE TO ARGUE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50 C OF THE ACT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE C ASE ON HAND. HE PRAYED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BE ADMITTED AND THE ISSUE BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF AO FOR RECONSIDERATION. LD.DR WAS ALSO HEARD. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT THAT ORDER OF CIT(A) IS EX PARTE THE ASSESSE E AND ASSESSE E HAS NO W FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM , WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FO R DE NOVO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 15 /03/2021. SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH MARCH, 2021 *GMV ITA NO . 250 /HYD./ 201 8 AY 20 09 - 10 MRS. BADERUNISA BEGUM , HYD. 4 COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M RS. BADERUNISA BEGUM, H.NO. 10 - 5 - 6, FLAT NO. 410, MY HOME GLORY APARTMENT, MASAB TANK, HYDERABAD . 2. ITO, WARD 7(1), HYDERABAD 3. ACIT, RANGE 7 , HYDERABAD 4. C IT( A ) - 3 , HYDERABAD . 5 . PR.CIT - 3 , HYDERABAD 6 D.R. ITAT HYDERABAD 7 . GUARD FILE