M.Muralidhar , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Hyderabad

ITA 645/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6454 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B SHANTHA KUMAR
• Keywords: Valuation report
• Section: 142(1); 147; 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B - SMC, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.645/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 M. MURALIDHAR, HYDERABAD - 500028. PAN: ACIPM 4431 H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(4), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI B. SHANTHA KUMAR REVENUE BY: SRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING: 21/01/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 /02/2020 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 1, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 0144/2015 - 16/ITO, WARD - 11(4)/CIT(A) - 1/HYD/2018 - 19, DATED 28/03/2019 PASSED U/S. 144 R.W.S 147 & U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2007 - 08. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE I N HIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE LD. AO U/S. 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL SOLD HIS PROPERTY AT KUKATPALLY, RR DISTRICT DURING THE FY 2006 - 0 7. THE ASSESSEE F AILED TO FILE HIS RETURN OF INCOME . SUBSEQUENTLY, IT WAS 2 REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AND HAD NOT DECLARED CAPITAL GAIN . THE ASSESSEE ALSO FAILED TO RESPOND TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD. AO U/S. 142(1) OF THE ACT. HENCE, THE LD. AO WAS COMPELLED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT ON 30/03/2015 WHEREIN THE LD. A.O. ASSESSED THE LTCG OF RS. 10,34,290 / - IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES HA VE NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE SUBMITTED BEFORE THEM AND THEREFORE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD MAY BE GRANTED SO AS TO DEMONSTRATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. AO . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THO UGH THE ASSESSEES EARLIER REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THERE WAS NO PROPER REPRESENTATION EXCEPT FILING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BASED ON WHICH THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERITS. IT WAS THEREFORE ARGUED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE PROVIDE D TO THE ASSESSEE TO EFFECTIVELY REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND SUBMITTED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES , HENCE IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A). 3 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, W E DO NOT FIND MUCH MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR. FROM THE ORDERS OF THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES IT IS APPARENT THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. AO. IT ALSO APPEARS THAT THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICIPATED IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF INCOME ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINANCIAL POSITION OF THE ASSESSEE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER B ACK TO THE FILE OF LD. AO FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION. I ALSO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IF THE ASSESSEE REQUESTS FOR OBTAINING THE VALUATION FROM THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY OF THE STATEMENT GOVERNMENT, THE LD. AO SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SAME AND THERE AFTER CONSID ERING THE VALUATION REPORT PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERIT. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 TH FEBR UARY, 2020. SD/ - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 05 TH FEBR UARY, 2020. OKK 4 COPY TO: - 1) M. MURALIDHAR, H.NO. 6 - 290, ROAD NO.3, VENKATESWARA NAGAR, CHINTAL, HMT ROAD, HYDERABAD. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(4), 10 TH FLOOR, SIGNATURE TOWERS, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 1, HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 1, HYDERABAD 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE