Mr.Mohammed Iqbal , Bangalore V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore

MA 115/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1109 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Fair market value

Judgement Text

MP NO.115/BANG/2019 MR. MOHAMMED IQBAL, BANGALORE IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.115/BANG/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.2351/BANG/2018) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 MR. MOHAMMED IQBAL NO.18/10-3, I FLOOR NO.10, DR. OOMER SHARIFF ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU PAN NO : AACPI1047D VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1) BENGALURU APPELLANT RESPONDENT A PPELLANT BY : SHRI K.G. NINGOJI RAO, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KANNAN NARAYANAN, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 11.12.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.12.2020 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25-04-2019 PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINAT E BENCH IN THE INCOME TAX APPEAL REFERRED IN THE CAPTION. THE ASS ESSEE HAS SUBMITTED IN THE PETITION THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT DISPOSED OF GROUND NO.7 URGED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE IT. 2. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD . WE NOTICE THAT THE ISSUE ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL RELATED TO TH E DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE (FMV) AS ON 01.04.1981 IN RESPECT OF A PROPERTY MP NO.115/BANG/2019 MR. MOHAMMED IQBAL, BANGALORE PAGE 2 OF 4 SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE. IN HIS COMPUTATION OF INCOME , THE ASSESSEE HAD ADOPTED FMV OF THE LAND AS ON 1.4.1981 AT RS.200/- PER SQ.FT. THE AO REFERRED TO SRO RATE AND ACCORDINGLY DETERMINED THE FMV AS ON 1.4.1981 AT RS.45/- PER SQ.FT. THE VALUE SO ADOPTE D BY THE AO WAS CONFIRMED BY LD CIT(A). BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE A SSESSEE CONTENDED THAT HIS SUBMISSIONS MADE ON THE ABOVE SAID ISSUE W ERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE AO. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT T HE AO DID NOT REFER THE MATTER OF VALUATION TO THE VALUATION OFFI CER. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES, THE TRIBUNAL RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 3. THE IMPUGNED PROPERTY WAS INHERITED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS MOTHER ON 27.11.1987. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE HA D TAKEN A GROUND BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS GROUND NO.7 URGING TH AT THE FMV AS ON 27.11.1987 SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADOPTED FOR COMPUTIN G CAPITAL GAIN. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THIS GROUND NO.7 WAS NOT ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THE SAME CONSTITUTES A MISTAKE APP ARENT FROM RECORD. 4. THE LD A.R REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE I N THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE C ONTENTION URGED IN GROUND NO.7 IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION RENDERE D BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF JAHANARA SHABAZ VS. I TO (ITA NO.235/BANG/2013 DATED 10-12-2014). 5. THE LD D.R, ON THE CONTRARY, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THIS GROUND BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AT THE TI ME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD A.R ARGUED ONLY THE GROUND WITH RESPECT TO VALUATION OF LAND AS ON 01-04-1981 AND H AS NOT PROSECUTED OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL.... MP NO.115/BANG/2019 MR. MOHAMMED IQBAL, BANGALORE PAGE 3 OF 4 ACCORDINGLY, THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE , HAVING NOT PRESSED OTHER GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING, COULD NOT HAVE FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AT ALL. THE LD D.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS ADOPTED THE FMV AS ON 01-04-1981 IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME, MEANING THEREBY, ASSESSEES M OTHER HAD ALSO INHERITED THE PROPERTY FROM SOME OTHER PERSON. THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT, AS PER EXPLANATION GIVEN UNDER SEC. 49(1)OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961 ['THE ACT' FOR SHORT], THE COST OF ACQUISI TION IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN MODES OF ACQUISITION HAS TO BE TAKEN TO BE THE COST INCURRED BY LAST OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER, IN CASE THE PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MODES LISTED OUT IN SEC.49. AC CORDINGLY THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE URGED I N GROUND NO.7 IS NOT MAINTAINABLE ON MERITS ALSO. 6. IN THE REJOINDER, THE LD A.R FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY BY INHE RITANCE AND THE IMPUGNED PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BY LEGAL ASCENDANTS LONG BACK. 7. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD . FROM PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL, WE NOTICE TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADVANCED HIS ARGUMENTS ONLY ON THE ISSUE OF DET ERMINATION OF FMV AS ON 1.4.1981, MEANING THEREBY, ALL OTHER GROU NDS WERE NOT PRESSED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IT IS NOT PERMISSIB LE TO RE-AGITATE A MATTER, WHICH WAS NOT PRESSED EARLIER. HENCE, AS R IGHTLY POINTED OUT BY LD D.R, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE FILED THIS M ISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AT ALL. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HI MSELF HAS ADOPTED THE FMV AS ON 1.4.1981 WHILE COMPUTING TOTAL INCOME , MEANING THEREBY, THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO AWARE OF THE EXPLANA TION GIVEN UNDER SEC.49 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. MP NO.115/BANG/2019 MR. MOHAMMED IQBAL, BANGALORE PAGE 4 OF 4 8. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO N FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH DEC, 2020 SD/- (BEENA PILLAI) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED 18 TH DEC, 2020. VG/SPS COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.