SELVARAJ SHANTHAMANI, COIMBATORE V. THE ITO, NCW 3(1), COIMBATORE

ITA 362/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8154 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 56; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C/SMC-II” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी मनोज कुमार अ#वाल, लेखा सद* के सम+। HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ IT A No.362/Chny/2021 (िनधा7रणवष7/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Selvaraj Shanthamani 207-A, Sathy Road, Sivanandhapuram, Saravanamapatty,Coimbatore – 641 035. बनाम/ V s . ITO, Non-Corporate Ward-3(1), Coimbatore. ;थायीलेखासं. /जीआइआरसं. / P AN / G I R No. B G DP S- 8 56 8- P (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : None थ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hearing : 12-09-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 12-09-2022 आदेश/ O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018- 19 arises out of the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 01.09.2021 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 10.03.2021. In this 2 appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of certain additions of Rs.13.51 Lacs which represent deemed letting value of four properties owned by the assessee. 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. However, I find that the material on record is sufficient enough for disposal of appeal. 3. Upon perusal of assessment order, it could be seen that the impugned addition represent deemed letting value of 4 properties owned by the assessee at Masagounden Chettipalaym, Annur S.F.No.655/3C, Site Nos. 37 to 40. These properties have been considered by Ld. AO as deemed to be let out. 4. During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that these properties were vacant land. However, the plea was rejected by Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee could not produce complete details and evidences to substantiate that the four properties were vacant land and there was no construction done in the said land. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before me. 5. Upon perusal of page nos. 32 to 35 of the paper-book, it could be seen that the Village Administrative Officer has certified that these properties are vacant sites. The said certificates were furnished by the assessee during e-proceedings also. The assessee, vide submissions dated 24.02.2021, submitted that these properties were vacant sites only and no income was derived from these vacant sites. To support the same, the payment receipts of vacant site development charges as paid to local authorities was also furnished. These documents 3 would show that the four sites were vacant land only which could not be deemed to be let out. The lower authorities have failed to consider these documents. Therefore, I have no hesitation in deleting the impugned addition. 6. The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 12 th September, 2022. Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखासद* /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे$ई/ Chennai; िदनांक/ Dated : 12.09.2022 JPV JPVJPV JPV आदेशकीOितिलिपअ#ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु: (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयु:/CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाडEफाईल/GF