ITO, CHENNAI V. Malathi Ramji, CHENNAI

ITA 298/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5702 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-11-2017
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAYA J NICHANE

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , ' # BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.298/MDS/2017 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(1), NO.16, GREAMS ROAD, 4 TH FLOOR, BSNL BUILDING, TOWER I, CHENNAI - 600 006. PAN : AABPR 4351 G V. SMT. MALATHI RAMJI, 2B, CORAL SANDS, NEW NO.26, BEACH ROAD, KALAKSHETRA COLONY, CHENNAI - 600 090. ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : MS. MAYA J. NICHANE, ADVOCATE / - 0' / DATE OF HEARING : 20.11.2017 12' - 0' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.11.2017 / 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) -16, CHENN AI, DATED 29.11.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS COMPU TATION OF CAPITAL GAIN. 2 I.T.A. NO.298/MDS/17 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND MS. MAYA J. NICHANE, THE LD.COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. FOR COMPUTING THE CAPITAL GAINS, THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS TAKEN THE MARKET VALUE ON THE DATE ON WHICH THE PROPERTY WAS INHERITED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE DEATH OF HER MOTHE R SMT. AKILA VAIDYANATHAN ON 09.10.2001. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE TO TAKE THE MARKET VALUE AS O N 01.04.1981. THE QUESTION ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHEN THE A SSESSEE INHERITED THE PROPERTY, WHETHER THE MARKET VALUE HA S TO BE TAKEN ON THE DATE OF INHERITANCE OR THE VALUE OF ASSET IN TH E HANDS OF THE ORIGINAL OWNER, NAMELY, THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT V. MANJU LA J. SHAH 355 ITR 474. THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT FOUND THAT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN THE HANDS OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER, NAMELY , MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE C IT(APPEALS), IN FACT FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENT OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT. T HEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRM ED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. 3 I.T.A. NO.298/MDS/17 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23 RD NOVEMBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 23 RD NOVEMBER, 2017. KRI. - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )* /APPELLANT 2. +,)* /RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A) 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.