Ashwin Joshi, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 284/HYD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3567 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2021
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Capital asset; Gift; Fair market value
• Section: 143(3); 201; 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) ITA NO. 284 /HYD/20 1 7 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 10 ) SHRI ASHWIN JOSHI, HYDERABAD. PAN AGXPJ 6884F ..APPELLANT. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1), HYDERABAD. ..RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 26.04 .2021. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 .05. 2021. O R D E R PER SHRI S.S. GODARA, J.M. : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASST. YEAR 20 09 - 10 ARISES FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 6 , HYDERABAD S ORDER DT. 25.11. 201 6 PASSED IN CASE NO. 0154/2015 - 16/CIT(A) - 6/15 - 16 IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER 2 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 254 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES . C ASE FILE PERUSED. 2. COMING TO THE ASSESSEE'S SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE IS THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAD ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADOPT FAIR MARKET VALUE (FMV) AS ON 1.4.1981 AT RS.900 PER SQ. YARD THAN THAT CLAIM ED AT RS.1600 PER SQ. YARD, WE STRAIGHTAWAY COME TO THE LOWER APPELLATE DISCUSSION READILY AS UNDER : 3 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 4 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 5 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 6 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 7 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 8 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 9 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 10 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AGAINST AND IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPUGNED FMV OF THE ASSESSEE CAPITAL ASSET AS ON 1.4.1981. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A DETAILED P APER B OOK RUNNING INTO 120 PAGES COMPRISING OF HI S WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE CIT(APPE ALS), TRIBUNALS FIRST ROUND ORDER DT.31.7.2013 (SUPRA), TRIBUNAL YET ANOTHER ORDER 11 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 DT.26.9.2008 IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. SRI NARSIMHA RAO (HUF) AND OTHERS (ITA NO.1240/HYD/2007) ESTIMATING THE FMV AS MUCH MORE THAN SRO PRICE KEEPING IN MIND THE CLINCHING FACT THAT THE SAME FOR REWAIVED ESTIMATION UNCHANGED FR O M 1976 TO 1995, SIMILAR OTHER ORDER S IN THE CASE OF SHRI G.VIJAY VS. DCIT & OTHERS DT.29.4.2005 (ITA NO.276/HYD/2003) AND SHRI AS HVEN DATLA VS. ITO IN ITA NO.107/HYD/2010 DT.29.10.2010 ; WRITTEN SUBMIS SIONS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), REGISTERED VALUERS REPORT DT.29.04.2009, DVOS REPORT DT.30.3.2015, CIT(APPEALS) FIRST ROUND LOWER APPELLATE ORDER DT.29.06.2012, THE ASSESSING OFFICERS FORMER ESTIMATION DT.19.12.2011, GIFT SETTLEMENT DT.28.7.2004 AN D SALE DEED DT.2.3.2009 FORM ING SUBJECT MATTER OF THE IMPUGNED CASE; RESPECTIVELY , STANDS PERUSED. 4. LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DETERMI NING THE FMV OF THE CAPITAL ASSET ( S ) AS RS.900 PER SQ. YARD ONLY 12 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 AS ON 1.4.1981 DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE SAME WAS SITUATED IN HYDERABAD CITY S VERY P OSH BANJARA HILLS AREA . A ND ALSO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED BY WAY OF PRODUCING SALE IN STANCES OF SUCH AFFLUENT LOCALITY(IES) THAT THE IMPUGNED CAPITAL ASSET(S) FMV DESERVES TO BE TAKEN AS ATLEAST RS.1500 PER SQ. YARD. WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE ASSESSEE'S ARGUMENT MAINLY GOING BY HIS REGISTERED VALUER REPORT DT.29.4.2009 WHEREIN HE HAS NOT EVEN TRIED T O ASCERTAIN AS TO WHETHER THE CORRESPONDING LOCALITY HAS SEEN ANY SALE DEED IN THE RELEVANT TIME SPAN OR NOT. IT HAS FURTHER COME ON RECORD THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS PRECISELY CONSIDERED ALL THE CORROBORATING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES W HILST ADOPTING THE I MPUGNED FMV @ RS.900 AS AGAINST THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION TAKING IT AS RS.25 ONLY. WE THUS SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE CIT(APPEALS) DETAILED DISCUSSION WHICH HAS ALREADY GRANTED MUCH MORE THAN THE APPROPRIATE RELIEF TO THE TAX PAYER; ALBEIT PRIMA FACIE. 5. COMING TO TRIBUNAL' S VARIOUS DECISIONS (SUPRA), LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH 13 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 COURT HAS ALSO AFFIRMED THE SAME. WE FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN THE ASSESSEE'S INSTANT LATTER ARGUMENT AS WELL SINCE SUCH AN ESTIMATION DOES NOT FORM A VALID PRECEDENT KEE PING IN MIND SINCE NOT EVEN PERTAINING TO THE VERY LOCALITY. WE FURTHER QUOTE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT FULL BENCH DECISION IN CIT VS. B. R. CONSTRUCTIONS (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP) (FB) DEFINING THE CONTOURS OF A JUDICIAL PRECEDENT TO BE APP LICABLE ONLY IF IT DISCUSSES ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS INVOLVED AS IDENTICAL FOOTING FOLLOWED BY THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS . WE ACCORDINGLY REJECT THE ASSESSEE'S INSTANT LATTER ARGUMENT AS WELL. 6. THIS ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31ST MAY, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT ME MBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DT. 31. 05 .2021. * REDDY GP 14 ITA NO. 284/HYD/2017 COPY TO : 1. SHRI ASHWIN JOSHI, 6 - 3 - 347, HATA DWARAKAPURI COLONY, PUNJAGUDDA, HYDERABAD. 2. DCIT, CIRCLE 14(1), HYDERABAD. 3. PR. C I T - 6 , HYDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS) - 6, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, HYDERABAD.