IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES SMC : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 269/H/2020 2011 - 12 MUNEER MOHAMMED, RANGA REDDY PAN DJNPM 1081C INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, VIKARABAD 2 270/H/2020 2011 - 12 BABUMIYA TAPPA, RANGA REDDY PAN BQDP2118J - DO - 3 271/H/2020 2011 - 12 SHABBIR MOHAMMED, HYDERABAD. PAN AWYPM 4569N - DO - 4 272/H/2020 2011 - 12 MOHAMMED SHAREEF, RANGA REDDY PAN HYQPS 8777B - DO - 5 272/H/2020 2011 - 12 JILANI BEGAM ABDUL, RANGA REDDY PAN BBWPA 1612 C - DO - 6 274/H/2020 2011 - 12 KHADER ABDUL, RANGA REDDY PAN AZPPA 4580R - DO - 7 277/H/2020 2011 - 12 MOHD. HAZI, HYDERABAD. PAN AGCPH 0110N - DO - 8 278/H/2020 2011 - 12 AHMED MOHD., HYDERABAD. PAN AJSPM 0950G - DO - ASSESSEE BY: SHRI K.A. SAI PRASAD REVENUE BY: S/ SHRI BALAKRISHNA & T. SUBRAMANYAM DATE OF HEARING: 0 2 /0 2 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04 /0 2 /2021 O R D E R T H ESE EIGHT ASSESSEE S APPEAL S FOR AY 20 11 - 12 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE C I T(A) - 2 , HYDERABAD S ORDER S ALL I TA NO. 269 /HYD/ 2020 AND OTHERS MUNEER MOHAMMED AND OTHERS. : - 2 - : DATED 06 / 0 1 / 201 1 , EXCEPT ITA NOS. 277 & 278/H/2020, WHICH ARE DATED 20/01/2020 , PASSED IN CASE S NO S . 10385, 10424, 10386, 10380, 10388, 10382, 10383 AND 10389/ 201 8 - 1 9 /CIT(A) - 2 , INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 1 43( 3) RWS 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 ; IN SHORT THE ACT. I HAVE HEARD ALL THE PARTIES. CASE F ILE PERUSED. 2. IT TRANSPIRED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT ALL THESE ASSESSEES HAVE RAISED AN IDENTICAL SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN TREATING THE IR AGRICULTURAL A CAPITAL ASSET ( S ) GIVING RISE TO LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS IN ISSUE . LEARNED COUNSELS FIRST AND FOREMOST CONTENTION IS THAT THE AU THORITIES BELOW HAVE NOWHERE PROVED THAT LAND(S) SOLD AS CAPITAL ASSET (S) WITHIN THE SPECIFIED D ISTANCE OF 8 KILOMETERS TO THE NEAREST MUNICIPALITY AS P ER SECTION 2(14) OF THE ACT. HE FILED THE LAND DISTANCE DETAILS ON RECORD BY WAY OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENC E WHICH WAS NOT THE MATTER OF ADJUDICATION EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT OR CIT(A)S ORDER IN DISPUTE. I THEREFORE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO RESTORE THE I TA NO. 269 /HYD/ 2020 AND OTHERS MUNEER MOHAMMED AND OTHERS. : - 3 - : INSTANT SOLE IDENTICAL ISSUE RAISED IN ALL THESE APPEALS BACK TO THE A SSESSING O FFICER FOR HIS A FRESH FACTUAL VERIFICATION. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL AT THIS STAGE ALSO SOUGHT TO BUTTRESS THE ASSESSEEES PLEADINGS THAT THE LAND IN DISPUTE HAS IN FACT BEEN SOLD IN THE SUBSEQUENT AY AND THEREFORE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS IN AY 2011 - 12 HEREIN WOULD NOT SURVIVE. I THEREFORE DIRECT THESE ASSESSEES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEMSELVES OR THROUGH THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ( S ) ON OR BEFORE 31 ST JULY, 2021 WITH ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE TO BE FOLLOWED BY THREE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARING. 4. THESE ASSESSE E S APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH FEBRUARY , 2021 . SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDE RABAD, DATED : 4 TH FEBRUARY , 20 2 1 K V I TA NO. 269 /HYD/ 2020 AND OTHERS MUNEER MOHAMMED AND OTHERS. : - 4 - : C OPY TO : 1 MUNEER MOHAMMED, RANGA REDDY C/O KATRAPATI & ASSOCIATES, 1 - 1 - 298/2/B/3, 1 ST FLOOR, ASHOK NAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 020 2 BABUMIYA TAPPA, RANGA REDD 3 SHABBIR MOHAMMED, HYDERABAD. 4 MOHAMMED SHAREEF, RANGA REDDY 5 JILANI BEGAM ABDUL, RANGA REDDY 6 KHADER ABDUL, RANGA REDDY 7 MOHD. HAZI, HYDERABAD. 8 AHMED MOHD., HYDERABAD. 9 ITO, WARD 1, VIKARABAD 10 C I T(A) 2 , HYDERABAD. 11 PR. CIT 2, HYDERABAD 12 ITAT, DR, HYDERABAD. 13 GUARD FILE.