, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2755/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 17(4), 121, UTHAMAR GANDHI SALAI, CHENNAI 600 034. V. SHRI S. RAJAGOPALAN, FLAT A-2, II FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI FLATS, VISHWANATHAPURAM MAIN ROAD, KODAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 024. PAN: AHSPR5840E (/ APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. NANDAKUMAR, JCIT / RESPONDENT BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 28.12.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.01.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 5, CHENN AI DATED 14.07.2016 AND PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2 I.T.A. NO. 2755/MDS/2015 2. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH NOT ICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED T O DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 3. SHRI V. NANDAKUMAR, THE LD. D.R., SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS COMPUTATION OF CA PITAL GAIN. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE INHERITED O NE-FOURTH SHARE OF THE PROPERTY AT KODAMBAKKAM FROM HIS FATHER SHRI R. SEETHARAMAN. IN FACT, SHRI R. SEETHARAMAN, THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE DIED ON 17.02.1990. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE INHERITED THE PROPERTY DURING THE FINANCIA L YEAR 1989-90. THEREFORE THE INDEXED COST OF ACQUISITION HAS TO BE ADOPTED FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE INHERITED THE PROPER TY FROM HIS FATHER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COMPUTED THE INDEXA TION FROM 01.04.1981, TAKING THE DATE OF ACQUISITION OF THE A SSET BY HIS FATHER SHRI R. SEETHARAMAN. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER RECOMPUTED THE CAPITAL GAIN BY ADOPTING THE INDEXED COST OF ACQUISITION FROM THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1989-90. 3 I.T.A. NO. 2755/MDS/2015 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE D.R., A ND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NO T IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEES FATHER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AND ON THE DEATH OF THE ASSESSEES FATHER ON 17.02.1990, THE ASSESSEE BEING ONE OF THE LEGAL HEIRS INHERITED ONE-FOURTH SHARE IN THE PROPE RTY. THE QUESTION ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE INDEXED COS T OF ACQUISITION HAS TO BE ADOPTED FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESS EE INHERITED THE PROPERTY OR THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEES FATHER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPIN ION, WHEN THE ASSESSEES FATHER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AND THE ASS ESSEE INHERITED THE PROPERTY ON THE DEATH OF THE FATHER, THE INDEXE D COST OF ACQUISITION HAS TO BE ADOPTED FROM THE YEAR IN WHIC H THE ASSESSEES FATHER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY. IN FACT, THE CIT (A PPEALS) BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT V MANJULA J SHAH (2013) 335 ITR 474 DIRECTED THE ASSE SSING OFFICER TO GIVE THE BENEFIT OF INDEXATION FROM 01.04.1981 P ROVIDED THE SAID PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEES FATHER PRIO R TO 01.04.1981. HENCE, THIS TRIBUNAL DID NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INT ERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY. ACCORDINGLY THE SAM E IS CONFIRMED. 4 I.T.A. NO. 2755/MDS/2015 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 5 TH JANUARY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . ) ( . . . ) (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 5 TH JANUARY, 2017. JR. !' /COPY TO: 1. ! #$ /APPELLANT 2. %#$ /RESPONDENT 3. &' ( )/CIT(A)-5, CHENNAI 4. &' /CIT 5. /DR 6. () /GF.