IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER W TA NO. 29/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), BANGALORE. VS. SMT. M.R. PRABHAVATHY, GOKULA HOUSE, GOKULA, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU 560 054. PAN: ACZPP 0933A APPELLANT RESPONDENT CO NO.92/BANG/2018 [IN WTA NO.29/BANG/2018 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 SMT. M.R. PRABHAVATHY, GOKULA HOUSE, GOKULA, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU 560 054. PAN: ACZPP 0933A VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), BANGALORE. CROSS OBJECTOR RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI C.H. SUNDAR RAO, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BENGALURU. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NA RENDRA SHARMA, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 28 .0 8 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 .09.2018 WTA NO.29/BANG/2018 & CO 92/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 3 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER WTA 29/B/18 IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2017 OF THE CIT(APPEALS), BENGALURU-6, BENGAL URU RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CO AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). 2. IN THE WEALTH TAX ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE UND ER THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 1957 (THE ACT), THE AO TREATED THE LAND OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE AT AKKELNAHALLI-MALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, BANGALORE AS PAR T OF ASSET OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING NET WEALTH OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ACT. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE SAID LANDS WERE AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND THEREFORE OUTSIDE THE A MBIT OF THE DEFINITION OF ASSETS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE TERM AS DEFINED IN SEC.2(EA)(V) OF THE ACT. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE VERY SAME LANDS WERE HELD TO BE NOT ASSETS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE ACT BY THE BANGALORE BENCH OF IT AT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN WTA 16 & 17/BANG/2014 FOR AY 2004-05 ORDER DATED 31.3.2015. THE CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISION HELD TH AT THE LAND IN QUESTION CANNOT BE TREATED AS PART OF THE ASSETS OF THE ASSE SSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF NET WEALTH FOR LEVY OF WEALTH TAX. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE REVENU E HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THE CO THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF INITIATION OF REASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS U/S.16(3) R.W.S. 17 OF THE ACT. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT AS AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS RELIED UPON BY T HE CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COUR T AND THE ISSUE HAS NOT ATTAINED FINALITY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CON TENTION OF THE REVENUE IN ITS WTA NO.29/BANG/2018 & CO 92/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 3 APPEAL IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT. THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT BEEN REVERSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. THE FACT THAT AN APPEAL HAS BEEN ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT CANNOT BE THE BASIS NOT TO FOLLOW THE DECISION OF A CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TH E TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE ON SAME ISSUE. WE THEREFORE DISMISS THE A PPEAL OF THE REVENUE. SINCE THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMIS SED, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO NECESSITY TO DECIDE THE CROSS OBJE CTION AT THIS STAGE AND THE CO IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL AND THE CO ARE D ISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 24 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- ( A.K. GARODIA ) ( N. V. VASUDEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. / D ESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. THE REVENUE 2. THE ASSESSEE 3. THE CIT 4. THE C IT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 . GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.