Ganesan Mani (HUF), CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 705/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4329 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2018
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Section: 143(3); 54F

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A BENCH, CHENNAI [ , . , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.703/CHNY/2017 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) SHRI GANESAN RAJENDRAN HUF, NO.2/143, OLD NO.3/32, NEHRU NAGAR, SEEMANCHERI, CHENNAI 600 119. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD -15(4), CHENNAI. PAN: AAFHG9619A ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) & ./ I.T.A.NO.704/CHNY/2017 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) SHRI GANESAN MURUGESAN (HUF), NO.2/143, OLD NO.3/32, NEHRU NAGAR, SEEMANCHERI, CHENNAI 600 119. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD -15(4), CHENNAI. PAN: AAFHG9621Q ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) & ./ I.T.A.NO.705/CHNY/2017 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) SHRI GANESAN MANI (HUF), NO.2/143, OLD NO.3/32, NEHRU NAGAR, SEEMANCHERI, CHENNAI 600 119. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD -15(4), CHENNAI. PAN: AAFHG9620R ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANTS BY : SHRI R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 12.02.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.02.2019 2 ITA NOS .703 TO 705/CHNY /2017 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-15, CHENNAI, ALL DATED 15.02.2017 IN ITA NO.670/2013- 14/CIT(A)-15/A.Y.2011-12, 639/A.Y.2011-12/CIT(A)-15/2013-14 & 671/A.Y.2011-12/CIT(A)-15/2013-14 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 PASSED U/S. 250(6) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE COMPUTATION OF THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN IN CASE OF ALL THE THREE ASSESSEES IS RELATED TO THE SAME INHERITED ANCESTRAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THEM JOINTLY, ALL THE APPEALS ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. THE ASSESSEES HAVE RAISED SEVERAL IDENTICAL GROUNDS IN THEIR APPEALS HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE ARGUED BEFORE US BY THE LD.AR IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT GRANTING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE ACT WHILE COMPUTING THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF THE ASSESSEES. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE HUF VIZ., SHRI GANESAN RAJENDRAN HUF, SHRI GANESAN MURUGESAN HUF & SHRI GANESAN MANI HUF, E-FILED THEIR RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 BELATEDLY ON 14.03.2012, 15.03.2012 & 3 ITA NOS .703 TO 705/CHNY /2017 15.03.2012 RESPECTIVELY ADMITTING NIL INCOME. THE CASES WERE SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY BASED ON THE AIR INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEES HAD SOLD IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR RS.4 CRORES AND THEREFORE NOTICE U/S.143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEES ON 07.09.2012. FINALLY ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT WAS PASSED ON 21.02.2014, 26.02.2014 & 21.02.2014 RESPECTIVELY WHEREIN THE LD.AO DENIED THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE SHRI GANESAN RAJENDRAN HUF AND SHRI GANESAN MANI HUF HAD NOT DEPOSITED THE SALE PROCEEDS IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT SCHEME ACCOUNT AND SHRI GANESAN MURUGESAN HAD FAILED TO CONSTRUCT THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD. ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO. 4. AT THE OUTSET THE LD.AR PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEES COULD NOT FURNISH THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES ON THE EARLIER OCCASIONS, HOWEVER NOW THEY ARE IN POSSESSION OF ALL THE REQUISITE EVIDENCE TO CLAIM THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S. 54F OF THE ACT. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO FOR DE-NOVA CONSIDERATION. THOUGH THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED FOR CONFIRMING THE ORDERS OF THE 4 ITA NOS .703 TO 705/CHNY /2017 LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES, DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION FOR THE MATTER TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. THOUGH WE DO NOT APPRECIATE THE LETHARGIC ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FURNISHING THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW TO REMIT THE ENTIRE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO FOR THE PROPER APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND TO EXAMINE THE LEGAL INTRICACY. ACCORDINGLY WE HEREBY REMIT THE ENTIRE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO FOR DE-NOVA CONSIDERATION. 6. IN THE RESULT ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 12 TH FEBRUARY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- /CHENNAI, /DATED 12 TH FEBRUARY, 2019 RSR /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. [ /GF ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER