Summit Communications Private Limited , Hyderabad V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle -8, Hyderabad

ITA 354/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5993 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y.V.S.T. SAI
• Keywords: Capital Gains
• Section: 154; 143(3); 153C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member, AND Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani, Accountant Member ITA No 354/Hyd/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Summit Communications (P) Ltd, Hyderabad PAN:AAJCS8426Q Vs. Asstt.C.I.T. Central Circle-8 Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue by : Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 23/03/2022 Date of pronouncement: 28/03/2022 ORDER Per K. Narsimha Chary, J.M Aggrieved by the order dated 17.03.2021, passed by the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad (“learned CIT”) in the case of M/s. Summit Communications (P) Ltd, (“the assessee”) for the A.Y, 2009-10 u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act), the assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case for the disposal of this appeal are that a search and seizure operation was conducted at the premises of the assessee and others and consequent thereto the Page 2 of 4 assessment was completed by order dated 30.12.2011 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act determining the income of the assessee at Rs.33,73,38,552/- by making certain additions. Subsequently, it was noticed by the learned Assessing Officer that while passing the order, the short-term capital gains were calculated after allowing indexation on acquisition of shares by mistake and, therefore, after issuing notice u/s 154, the learned Assessing Officer assessed the income at Rs.34,04,89,166/- by adding a sum of Rs.31,50,614/- towards indexation already allowed but now withdrawn. 3. When the assessee preferred appeal against the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Act, learned CIT (A), after considering the submissions of the assessee in the light of the material available on record, did not agree with the contentions of the assessee and dismissed the same by way of the impugned order. 4. Hence assessee preferred this appeal on various grounds stating that the assessee held the shares as long-term assets, the assessee derived long term capital loss on the sale of shares and disallowance indexation cost of acquisition of shares for the purpose of calculation of the capital gains is bad in law. According to the assessee, the assessee was in possession of the shares for a period of two years deriving long term gains/loss and since the issue are debatable one, exercise of jurisdiction u/s 154 of the Act is not sustainable.