Padmaja Gavini, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward 8(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

MA 31/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3010 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Section: 2(14)

Judgement Text

MA NO 31 OF 2015 SMT PADMAJA GAVINI HYDERABAD PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT.ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.NO.31/HYD/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.705/HYD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) SMT . PADMAJA GAVINI 8-3-224/C/4/ A/44 MADHURA NAGAR, HYDERABAD PAN- ADZPG 0442 L VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(1) IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAMAKRISHNA BANDI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 10/04/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 /05/2015 O R D E R PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M. BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS P OINTED OUT THAT THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL THAT FIXTURES AND FITTINGS ARE PERSONAL ASSETS NOT FALLING U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT MAY OR MAY NOT BE CORRECT IN LAW. BUT THE LATER PART OF OR DER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.705/HYD/2014 GIVING CONTRADICTOR Y DIRECTION WHILE UPHOLDING THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSIONER T O BRING TO TAX SUCH SALE PROCEEDS OF FIXTURES AND FITTINGS UNDER T HE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IS ERRONEOUS AND IS A M ISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE OF THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER IN ITA NO.705/HYD/2014 CAN BE CORRECT. IF IT TO BE HELD THAT FIXTURES AND FITTING S WHICH ARE PERSONAL ASSET DOES NOT FALL U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT, THEN FOR THE VERY SAME REASON IT CANNOT BE TAXED EVEN UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 2. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THIS PETITION THAT THE ABOVE MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL APART FROM BEING CONTRADI CTORY IS ALSO A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AS THERE CANNOT BE TWO DIFFERENT MA NO 31 OF 2015 SMT PADMAJA GAVINI HYDERABAD PAGE 2 OF 2 FINDINGS FOR THE SAME ITEM FOR TAXING IT UNDER TWO DIFFERENT HEADS OF INCOME. IT WAS STATED THAT ONCE IT IS PERSONAL A SSET TO BE FALLING OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 2(14) OF THE ACT, IT CANNOT FOR THE SAME REASON BE TAXABLE EVEN UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 3. HENCE THE PETITIONER PRAYED THAT THE TRIBUNAL MA Y RECALL ITS ORDER IN ENTIRETY AND HEAR THE SAME ON MERITS. ALTE RNATIVELY, IT WAS PRAYED THAT THE TRIBUNAL MAY RECALL ITS ORDER I N UPHOLDING THE DIRECTION OF THE CIT TO BRING TO TAX THE SALE P ROCEEDS OF FIXTURES AND FITTINGS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM O THER SOURCES AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE SAME IS NOT EXGIBLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS THE SAID FI XTURES AND FITTINGS ARE PERSONAL IN NATURE AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THE TRIBUNAL DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE. 4. WE FIND THAT AN ERROR HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD AS POINTE D OUT BY THE PETITIONER. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE RECALL THE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO REPOST THE APPE AL AND INFORM THE DATE OF POSTING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH MAY, 2015. S D/ - S D/ - (P.M. JAGTAP) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 13 TH MAY, 2015. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. SMT. PADMAJA GAVINI, C/O K. VASANTKUMAR & AV RAGHURAM, ADVOCATES, 610, 6 TH FLOOR, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(1) IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD 3. THE CIT-II HYDERABAD 4. THE ACIT RANGE 8 HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER