Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-11(1), Hyderabad V. Vaddepally Damodar Rao , Hyderabad

ITA 890/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3035 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Competent authority; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 54F; 64; 13; 147; 54

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SL.NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 732/H/201 9 2011 - 12 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), HYDERABAD. KONDAL RAO VADDEPALLY, HYDERABAD. PAN - ACOPV 2193 D 2 889/HYD/2019 2011 - 12 - DO - SU D ARSHAN RAO INENI, HYDERABAD. PAN - AAGPI 0333J 3 890/H/2019 2011 - 12 - DO - VADDEPALLY DAMODAR RAO, HYDERABAD. PAN - ABSPV 5001 H REVENUE BY: SHRI ROHIT MUJUMDAR ASSESSEE BY: SHRI K.C. DEVDAS DATE OF HEARING: 27 /0 5 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18 /0 6 /2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M. : TH E S E APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST CIT(A) 5 , HYDERABADS SEPARATE ORDER S FOR AY 20 1 1 - 1 2 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) RWS 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ; IN SHORT THE ACT. AS THE FACTS AND GROUNDS A RE I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 2 - : IDENTICAL IN THESE APPEALS, THEY WERE CLUBBED AND HEARD TOGETHER AND THEREFORE A COMMON ORDER IS PASSED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL, WHICH ARE COMMON IN ALL THE APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 1. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ORDER OF THE ID.CIT(A) IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, IS N - OT PERVERSE, ILLEGAL AND LIKELY TO BE SET ASIDE. 2. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE, ID.CIT(A) ERR ED IN NOT UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESTRICTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TO ONE FLAT AS AGAINST THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION IN RESPECT OF THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTED AREA RECEIVED. 3. WHET HER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ID.CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 54F WHEN THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED MULTIPLE FLATS LOCATED ON DIFFERENT FLOORS SEPARATED BY DIFFERENT BLOCKS OF A GATED COMMUNITY/ APARTMENT COMPLEX. 4. WHETH ER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ID.CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION RELYING ON THE DECISION OF SRI SYED ALI ADIL BY NOT CONSIDERING THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE DISTINGUISHABLE AND NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 5. ANY OTHER GROUND(S) THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. AS THE FACTS AND GROUNDS R AISED IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, WE CULL OUT THE FACTS FROM THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 3 - : 732/HYD/2019 . THE DECISION TAKEN IN THIS APPE AL MUTATIS MUTANDIS SHALL APPLY TO THE OTHER APPEALS. 4. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVI DUAL. FOR THE AY 2011 - 12, THE AO INITIATED ACTION U/S 147 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE ENTERED INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH 12 OTHERS WITH M/S SUMASHAILA DEVELOPERS IN RESPECT OF LAND OF AC.10.20 GUNTAS SITUATED AT KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD ON 14/02/2011. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,50,130/ - . THE AO HAD TAKEN UP THE CASE FOR SCRUTINY AND COMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 3,03,81,700/ - . 5 . THE FACTS RELATING TO THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THE EXEMPTION U/S 54F, ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT MADE IN THE CONSTRUCTED AREA COMPRISING OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL FLATS (MORE THAN ONE IN NUMBER), WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE A SSESSEE , AS AN APPLICATION OF THE CONSIDERATION WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSFER OF HIS SHARE OF LAND. THE AO, HOWEVER HAS RESTRICTED THE EXEMPTION U /S . 54F CLAIMED BY THE A SSESSEE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF INVESTMENT IN ONE RESIDENTIAL FLAT AND DENIED ON THE OTHER RESIDE NTIAL FLATS. 6 . AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND BEFORE THE CIT(A) T HE ASSESSEE HAD CITED I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 4 - : SEVERAL DECISIONS INCLUDING THAT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THAT EXEMPTION U / S 54F HAS TO BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF A RESID ENTIAL HOUSE WHICH CONSIST OF MULTIPLE UNITS AND OF JURISDICTIONA L IT AT WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SEC. 54F EXEMPTION HAS TO BE ALLOWED EVEN IF SUCH INDEPENDENT UNITS OR ON DIFFERENT FLOORS. THE RELEVANT PART OF DECISIONS WITH CITATION S ARE REPRODUCED A S UNDER: 1. VIRTAL KRISHNA CONJEEVARAMVS ITO (144 LTD 325) (HYD) : IN THIS CASE THE HON'BLE ITAT, HYDERABAD HELD AS UNDER: - 'EXEMPTION U/ S. 54F ONLY REQUIRES THAT THE PROPERTY SHOULD BE OF RESIDENTIAL NATURE AND THE FACT THAT THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE CONSISTS OF SEVERAL INDEPENDENT UNITS CANNOT BE AN IMPEDIMENT TO GRANT RELIEF U/S. 54F EVEN IF SUCH INDEPENDENT UNITS ARE ON DIFFER ENT FLOORS. ' 2. CIT VS SYED ALI ADIL ( DECISION OF AP HIGH COURT DATED 20.12.2012): IN THIS CASE THOUGH THE DECISION WAS RENDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF SEC 54 OF THE IT ACT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION IN RESPECT OF A RESIDENTIAL H OUS E WHICH CONSISTS OF MULTIPLE UNITS.' 7 . THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE ELABORATE SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS CASE LAW CITED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WERE EXTRACTED IN HIS ORDER AT PAGES 11 TO 20 HELD THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT EVEN IF THE INV ESTMENT IS MADE IN MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL HOUSES/UNITS, THE APPELLANT WILL BE ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 54F. FURTHER, HE HELD THAT I T IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT AN AMENDMENT U/ S. 54F TOOK PLACE VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2014, WHEREIN, 'A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE' I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 5 - : WAS SUBSTITUTED WITH 'ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IN INDI A W.E.F. 01.04.2015. THE SAID AMENDMENT VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT PRIOR TO 01.04.2015, THE SECTION DID NOT RESTRICT THE INVESTMENT TO ONLY ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. THEREFORE , FROM THE ABOVE DECISIONS AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT, THE REINVESTMENT QUANTUM FOR ELIGIBILITY U/ S. 54F CANNOT BE LIMITED TO ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. THEREFORE, HE DIRECTED THE AO TO CONSIDER ALL THE RESIDENTIAL FLATS REC EIVED AS CONSIDERATION AS PART OF RE - INVESTMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 54F. 8 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 9 . THE LD. CIT - DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO, WHILE, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 10 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THE AO RESTRICTED THE EXEMPTION U/S 54F CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF INVESTMENT IN ONE RESIDENTIAL FLAT AND DENIED ON THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL FLATS. WHEREAS THE CIT(A) HELD THAT IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT AN AMENDMENT U/S. 54F TOOK PLACE VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2014, WHEREIN, 'A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE' WAS SUBSTITUTED WITH 'ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IN INDIA W.E.F. 01.04.2015. THE SAID AMENDMENT VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 6 - : PRIOR TO 01.04.2015, THE SECTION DID NOT RESTRICT THE INVESTMENT TO ONLY ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. THEREFORE, FROM THE ABOVE DECISIONS A ND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT, THE REINVESTMENT QUANTUM FOR ELIGIBILITY U/S. 54F CANNOT BE LIMITED TO ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. THEREFORE, HE DIRECTED THE AO TO CONSIDER ALL THE RESIDENTIAL FLATS RECEIVED AS CONSIDERATION AS PART OF RE - INVESTMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 54F. 10 .1 IT IS CLEAR FROM THE SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT DATED 20 TH MARCH, 2013, WHICH IS EXECUTED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE & DEVELOPER AND THE DETAILS OF TOTAL CONSTRUCTION AREA IS AS UNDER AS PER PAGE NO. 44 OF PAPER BOOK: A) OPEN PLOTS 4 NOS B) 2/3 BEDROOM BLOCKS 10 BLOCKS (BLOCK 1 TO 10) C) EWS/LIG BLOCKS 2 BLOCKS (BLOCK 11/A AND 11/B) D) INDEPENDENT VILLAS 40 NOS (VILLA NO. 1 TO 40 E) CLUB HOUSE AND AMENITIES F) TOT LOTS AND MANDATORY OPEN AREAS G) ROAD AND DRIVEWAYS 10.2 THE DETAILS OF EACH BLOCK AREA AS PER PAGE NO. 46 OF PAPER BOOK, ARE AS UNDER: APARTMENT EACH BLOCK AREA STATEMENT BLOCK NO. CONSTRUCTION PATTERN EACH FLOOR AREA AREA IN 5 FLOORS B1 C+S+5 FLOOR 7962 39810 B2 C+S+ 5 FLOOR 7962 39810 B3 C+S+5 FLOOR 7962 39810 B4 C+S+5 FLOOR 7962 39810 B5 S+5 FLOOR 6194 30970 I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 7 - : B6 C+S+5 FLOOR 6194 30970 B7 C+S+5 FLOOR 12189 60945 B8 C+S+5 FLOOR 12170 60850 B9 C+S+5 FLOOR 15099 75494 B10 S+5 FLOOR 5589 27945 B11/A S+5 FLOOR 17012 86935 B11/B S+5 FLOOR 2954 14770 TOTAL BUILT UP AREA IN FLATS = 547120 SFT VILLA AREA STATEMENT VILLAS NOS BUILT UP AREA TOTAL AREA EAST 20 3135 62700 WEST 20 3175 63500 TOTAL AREA IN VILLAS (SFT) = 126200 OPEN PLOT AREA STATEMENT PLOT NO LAND AREA OPEN 1 625 SQ.YDS OPEN 2 625 SQ.YDS OPEN 3 625 SQ.YDS OPEN 4 625 SQ.YDS 10.3 ALLOTMENT OF THE APARTMENT UNITS BETWEEN FIRST PARTY AND SECOND PARTY: AREA DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS OWNERS AREA DEVELOPMENT AREA BLOCK DESCRIPTION AREA IN SFT BLOCK AREA IN SFT DESCRIPTION B2 FULL BLOCK 39810 B1 39810 FULL BLOCK B3 FULL BLOCK 39810 B4 31935 PARTIAL BLOCK B4 FLAT 1 X 5 FLRS 7875 B7 60945 FULL BLOCK B5 FULL BLOCK 30970 B8 15050 2X3BHK X 5FLOOR B6 FULL BLOCK 30970 B9 30197 PARTIAL I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 8 - : BLOCK B8 PARTIAL BLOCK 45800 B10 12289 PARTIAL BLOCK B9 PARTIAL BLOCK 45298 B11/A 18943 EWS B10 PARTIAL BLOCK 15656 B11/A 30082 LIG B11/A EWS 15847 B11/B 7670 EWS B11/B EWS 7100 TOTAL AREA IN SFT = 300199 246921 SFT COLLECTIVE AREA = 300199 + 246921 = 547120 10.4 ALLOTMENT OF THE APARTMENTS UNITS BETWEEN FIRST PARTY AND SECOND PARTY IN THE RATIO OF 42 : 58 AT PAGE NO. 50 OF PAPER BOOK, IS ENCLOSED TO THE ORDER AS ANNEXURE 1. 10.5 BLOCK - WISE DETAILS ARE GIVEN AT PAGE 82 OF PAPER BOOK, WHICH IS ENCLOSED TO THE ORDER AS ANNEXURE 2 . 10.6 FURTHER, IN THE AGREEMENT AT PAGE 63 & 64 OF THE PAPER BOOK ARE MENTIONED AS UNDER: 12. THAT THE 'PARTIES' HAVE FURTHER AGREED THAT WITH REGARD TO THE DIVISION OF THE CONSTRUCTED AREA IN RESIDENTIAL TOWNSHIP, THE SAME SHALL BE DONE AS PER THE FOLLOWING: 'APPROXIMATE TOTAL AREA OF CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENTS = 5,36,905 SFT TOTAL NUMBER OFINDEPENDENT VILLAS APPROXIMATELY = 40 NOS (1,00,000 SFT) THE FIRST PARTY (OWNERS) SHALL BE ALLOTTED AN AREA OF 3,00,000 SFT AS THEIR ENTIRE SHARE AND THE BALANCE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION OF FLATS AND INDEPENDENT HOUSES COMES TO THE SHARE OF TH E 'SECOND PARTY'( DEVELOPERS! BUILDERS) ON THE PLAN BEING SANCTIONED AND SUCH I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 9 - : ALLOCATION TO BE RECORDED IN WRITING AND THE'PARTI E S' WILL ENDEAVOUR TO MAKE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE SHARES IN FLATS! HOUSES OR BLOCK WISE. THE MAXIMUM EXCESS AR EA OVER PROPOSED INITIAL AREA OF APARTMENTS IN THE LAND EARMARKED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FLATS AS PER THE ATTACHED TENTATIVE DRAWING SHALL NOT CROSS BEYOND 1 % OF 5,36,905 SFT. IF ANY EXCESS AREA IS CONSTRUCTED BEYOND 1 % IN EXCESS OF 5,36,905 SFT, THEN, THE E XCESS AREA SHALL BE SHARED AMONG THE FIRST PARTY AND THE SECOND PARTY AS PER 40 : 60 RATIO - RESPECTIVELY. ANY AREA ARRIVED WITHIN THE EXCESS OF 5,36,905 SFT . SHALL BELONG TO THE SHARE OF THE SECOND PARTY AFTER GIVING FIRST PARTY' ITS TOTAL SHARE OF 3,00,000 SFT. HOWEVER, THE SECOND PARTY IS AT LIBERTY TO DO ANY CHANGES IN THE AREA EARMARKED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAS, EITHER TO CONSTRUCT FLATS OR VILLAS, INCREASE OR DECREASE THE AREA, AS PER THE WILL OF THE SECOND. PARTY ONLY, WITHOUT DISTURBING THE AREA EARMARKED FOR APARTMENTS, AND THAT THE FIRST PARTY SHALL NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION OR RIGHT ON IT. TYPIC OF CON ST R UCTION FIRST PARTY SECOND PARTY (OWNERS) (,DEVELOPERS) APARTMENT/FLATS 300000 SFT 236905 SFT 536905 SFT INDEPENDENT HOUSES NIL 100000 SFT 100000 SFT A P P R OX. AREA OF CONSTRUCTION FOR FLATS IN TOTAL: 5,36,905 SFT APPROX. AREA OF CONSTRUCTION FOR INDEPENDENT HOUSES: 1,00,000 SF T (40 VILLAS) ALL THE' AREAS CONSJDEREDIMENTIONED HEREIN ARE AS PER SALEABLE AREA IN SFT ONLY WHICH INCLUDES TOTAL CONSTRUCTED AREA INCLUDING BALCONIES, SIT OUT, STAIRCASES, LIFT ROOMS, SECURITY ROOMS, GAMES ROOM, IF ANY; ELECTRICAL METER ROOM, ECONOMIC WEAKER SECTION, LOW INCOME GROUP HOUSING, PUMP ROOM, GENERATOR ROOMS IF I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 10 - : ANY, COMMON AREAS, CIRCULATION AREAS BUT EXCLUDES CAR PARKING AREA. THE CONSTRUCTION AREAS AND THE LAYOUT MAY BE ALTERED BY THE SECOND PARTY TO MEET THE MARKETABILITY DEMANDS, AT ANY STAGE OR AS PER STIPULATED RULES OF CONCERNED AUTHORITIES. THAT THE FIRST PARTY SHALL RETAIN AN AREA OF 2500 SQ. YDS OUT OF AC 10 - 20 GUNTAS FOR THEIR EXCLUSIVE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF THE FIRST PARTY WITH ABSOLUTE RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP. THE SECOND PARTY IS NOT HAYING ANY C LAIM IN AND OVER THE 2500 SQ. YDS WHICH IS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE PLAN IN RED COLOUR ANNEX TO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE SAID AREA IS ABUTTING THE 60 FEET OF MAIN ROAD WHICH IS FACING TOWARDS EAST AND SOUTH AFTER DELETING THE AREA FOR THE TRANSFORMER YARD ON THE COMER OF SOUTH EAST. THE SECOND PARTY SHALL PROVIDE SUPPLY LINES FOR ELECTRICAL, DRAINAGE, WATER (GOUND AND MUNICIPAL) ETC AND TO DEVELOP THEM TO THE STAGE OF OPEN PLOTS . HOWEVER, ANY FURTHER CONSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPLIED EXPENSES AND DEPOSITS SHALL BE BORNE BY THE FIRST PARTY ITSELF. MOREOVER, ENTRY FROM THESE EARMARKED OPEN PLOTS INTO THE DEVELOPED LAYOUT SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED THAT, A CLOSED COMPOUND WALL SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TOWARDS THE WEST SIDE OF THE SAID PLOTS TO RESTRICT THE ACCESS. L F MADE MANDATORY BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT EITHER ECONOMIC WEAKER SECTION OR LOW INCOME GROUP. HOUSING, AND AS SUCH, THE CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES SHALL BE BORNE BY SECOND PARTY ONLY, BUT THE AREA WILL BE SHARED AMONG THE FIRST AND SECOND PARTIES @ 40% AND 60 % RESPECTIVELY BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND PARTIES. THE MORTGAGE OF PROPERTY TOWARDS LAYOUT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CONCERNED AUTHORITIES SHALL BE MADE AS PER THE 40% SHARE OF THE FIRST PARTY AND60 % SHARE OF T HE SEC OND PARTY. I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 11 - : F OR THE MORTGAGE OF PROPERTY TOWARDS BUILDING PERMISSION FOR THE CONCERNED AUTHOR ITIES, OUT OF THE TOTAL AREA TO BE MORTGAGED, THE FIRST PARTY SHALL MORTGAGE 30,000 SFT FROM ITS SHARE OF APARTM ENT AREA AND THE BALANCE TOTAL SHORTFALL AREA TO BE MORTGAGED SHALL BE MADE BY THE SECOND P ARTY ONLY FROM ITS SHARE OF APARTMENTS AND INDEPENDEN T VILLAS. ANY LEGAL ISSUES / CLAIMS / SETTLEMENTS PERTAINING TO THE SCHEDULED LAND SHALL BE CLEARED A ND MADE FREE OF ANY SUCH CLAIMS AT THE RISK AND COST OF THE FIRST PARTY ONLY IN REASONABLE TIME . DEVIATION IN CONSTRUCTION SHALL NOT BE ENTERTAINED IN ANY WAY BY THE SECOND PARTY. THE SECOND PARTY SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO CHECK THE LEGALITY IN ANY MANNER AS DEEMED FIT TO ENSURE THE TITLE RIGHTS. THERE SHALL NOT BE ANY OBJECTION BY THE FIRST PARTY IN THE PROCESS ADOPTED BY THE SECOND PARTY FOR THE SAME. THE SECOND PARTY IS AT LIBERTY TO PROMOTE / ADVERTISE / MARKET IN ANY FORM OF MEDIA AS DEEMED FIT AND THE FIRST PARTY SHALL NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TOWARDS IT AS LONG AS IT IS DONE ON THE NAME OF THE SECOND PARTY. 10 . 7 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RELIED ON THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GEETA DUGAL (ITA NO. 1237/2011 DATED 21/02/2013) AND HONBLE AP, KARNATAKA HIGH COURTS JUDGEMENTS AS WELL AS THE DECISION OF ITAT, HYDERABAD. IN ALL THESE JUDGEME NTS, THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED WAS IN RESPECT OF MULTIPLE UNITS ON DIFFERENT FLOOR/FLOORS IN A B LOC K/TOWER. BUT, IN THESE CASES, IT IS NOT CLEAR AS TO WHETHER ONE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ALLOTTED I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 12 - : HOUSE/HOUSES IN A BLOCK/TOWER . WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ALLOTMENT OF A PARTMENT , WHICH HAS BEEN ENUMERATED IN PARA 10.3 CITED SUPRA, IT IS CLEAR THAT SOME OF THE BLOCKS HAVE BEEN ALLOTTED FULLY TO THE ASSESSEE /ASSESSEES AND SOME OF THE BLOCKS ARE PARTIALLY ALLOTTED AMONGST THE ASSESSEES AND DEVELOPERS. IN THIS REGARD, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY DOCUMENTS OR ANY ALLOTMENT LETTER FOR ASCERTAINING THE NUMBER OF FLATS ALLOTTED TO THE ASSESSEE/ASSESSEES BY TH E DEVELOPERS WHICH IS ROOT FOR DETERMINING THE DEDUCTION U/S 54 F OF THE IT ACT. THE CIT(A) S DECISION IS RIGHT IF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ALLOTTED A HOUSE OR MORE THAN A HOUSE IN A BLOCK /TOWER AS PER THE DECISION CITED SUPRA . THE SAID BLOCKS CONSIST OF MORE THAN A FLOOR I.E. 5 FLOORS. WE, THEREFORE, REMIT THIS FILE BACK TO THE AO FOR VERIFICATION FOR THE ALLOTMENT OF FLATS , WHICH HAVE BEEN ALLO T TED TO THE ASSESSEE IN A BLOCK /TOWER OR IN DIFFERENT BLOCKS /TOWERS . IF THE AO IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ALLOTTED RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN MORE THAN BLOCK S/TOWERS , THE AO WILL RECOMPUTE THE CAPITAL GAIN AFRESH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM U/S 54F BY PRODUCING NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND AVOID UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 13 - : 1 1 . AS THE FACTS AND GROUNDS RAISED IN OTHER APPEALS IN ITA NOS. 889 & 890/HYD/2019 ARE SIMILAR TO THAT OF ITA NO. 732/HYD/2019, FOLLOWING THE DECISION THEREIN, THESE APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. A COPY THIS COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN RESPECTIVE CASE FILES . 12. IN THE RESULT, ALL TH E APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION AR E PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PU RPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH JUNE , 2021 . SD/ - SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) (L . P . SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDE RABAD, DATED : 18 TH JUNE , 20 2 1 . K V C OPY TO : 1 THE DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), ROOM NO. 1012, 10 TH FLOOR, SIGNATURE TOWERS, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD 8 4 2 SHRI KONDAL RAO VADDEPALLY, PLOT NO.381, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, SIGNATURE TOWERS, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD 500 084. 3 SHRI SUDARSHAN RAOINENI, DOOR NO. 5 - 3 - 418/A/1, SESHADRI NAGAR, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD 500 072. 4 SHRI VADDEPALLI DAMODAR RAO, PLOT NO. 381, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, KUKATPALL Y, HYDERABAD 500 072. 5 C I T(A) 5 , HYDERABAD. 6 PR. CIT - 5 , HYDERABAD 7 ITAT, DR, HYDERABAD. 8 GUARD FILE. I TA NO. 732 /HYD /201 9 AND OTHERS KONDALA RAO V AND OTHERS , HYD. : - 14 - : S.NO. DETAILS DATE 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 7 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO A.R. 10 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER