IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD S.M.C. BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) I.T.A. NO. 574 /HYD/20 20 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 15 - 16 ) SHRI MADHUSUDAN MANGALAPALLY, HYDERABAD - 500 012 PAN AENPM 9895C .APPELLANT. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), HYDERABAD. ..RESPONDENT . APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. RAMA RAO. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M. MAHIDHAR (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING : 22.06. 2021. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.07 .2021. O R D E R THIS IS ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , HYDERABAD DT. 18.10.2019. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CA SE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE , AN INDIVIDUAL, SOLD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY VIDE DOCUMENT NO.237/2015 DT.9.2.2015 ALONG WITH HIS BROTHER MANGALAPALLY SRINIVAS RAO FOR 2 ITA NO. 574/HYD/2020 A CONSIDERATION OF RS.1,62,27,000/ - . SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME OFFERING THE CAPITAL GAINS TO TAX, NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED TH A T THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S.1 48 AND THEREFORE , A NOTICE U/S. 142(1) WAS ISSUED REQUIRING THE ASSESSEE TO FILE HIS RETURN OF INCOME. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER DT.16.11.2018 OBJECTING TO THE REOPENING. THE ASSESSEE'S OBJECTIONS WERE REJECTED VIDE ORDER DT.22.11.2018 AND THEREAFTER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE RETURN OF INCOME OR FURNISH INFORMATION CALLED FOR, THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPUTED THE LONG TERM C APITA L GAINS BY REDUCING THE INDEX COST OF ACQUISITION AND BROUGHT THE LTCG OF RS.21,44,736. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE CIT(A). ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE A.OS ACTION AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 3 ITA NO. 574/HYD/2020 3. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT W HILE COMPUTING THE COST OF ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A) HAVE NOT CONSIDERED THE REGISTRATION CHARGE S ALSO AS PART OF COST OF ACQUISITION FOR DETERMINING THE CAPITAL GAIN. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.54 OF THE ACT WAS DENIED FOR WANT 4 ITA NO. 574/HYD/2020 OF PROOF. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE AND THEREFOR E PRAYED FOR REMAND OF THE ASSESSMENT TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH CONSIDERATION. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS ALSO HEARD. 5 . HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT THAT BOTH THE ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS FIRST APPEAL ARE DE CIDED EXPARTE, I DEEM IT PROPER TO REMAND THE ASSESSMENT TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORD ANCE WITH LAW. HOWEVER, THE VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE U/S.148 WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHA L L NOT B E RE CONSIDERED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND JULY, 2021. SD/ - (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DT. 2ND JU LY , 2021. * REDDY GP 5 ITA NO. 574/HYD/2020 COPY TO : 1. SHRI MADHUSUDAN MANGALAPALLY, 1 - 1 - 300/1A,STREET NO.13, ASHOK NAGAR, HYDERABDA - 500 012 2. ITO, WARD 4(1), HYDERABAD. 3. PR. C I T - 1, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS) - 1, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, HYDERABAD.