Mrs Rubina Faizuddin, Hyderabad v. DCIT, Hyderabad

ITA 1681/HYD/2008 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 168122514 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN ABWPS5522L
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1681/HYD/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
Appellant Mrs Rubina Faizuddin, Hyderabad
Respondent DCIT, Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 09-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 09-03-2010
Next Hearing Date 09-03-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 21-11-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A' HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AKBER BASHA ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR ITA NO.1681/HYD/08 : ASST T. YEAR 2004-05 MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN HYDERABAD ( PAN ABWPS 5522 L ) V/S. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(1) HYDERABAD . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.FAKHRUDDIN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. K.V.N.CHARYA O R D E R PER G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004- 05 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER- '1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ERRED IN DETERMINING THE VALUE OF LAND ACQUIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT AT RS.35 PER SQ. YARD AS ON 01-04-1981 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ERRED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT THAT IT SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT RS.50 PER SQ. YARD ON THE FACTS AND I N THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NO.1681/HYD/08 MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN HYDERABAD 2 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS FILED BY THE APPEL LANT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST INCOME ACCR UES FROM YEAR TO YEAR AND AS SUCH ONLY THE INCOME ACCR UING DURING HIS PREVIOUS YEAR CAN BE BROUGHT TO TAX THIS YEAR ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE APPEL LANT RETURNED INTEREST FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD UNDER A MIS TAKEN NOTION OF LAW HE HAS TO SUFFER TAX IN SPITE OF REAL IZING MISTAKE AND MAKING THE CLAIM BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.' 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO ISSUES IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. FIRST ISSUE IS REGARDING THE DETERMINATION OF THE VALUE OF THE LAN D AS ON 1.4.1981. HE SUBMITTED THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CAPITAL GAINS FAIR MARKET VALUE (F.M.V.) OF THE LAND AS ON 1.4.1981 WAS TO BE ADOPTE D AND THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE F.M.V. OF THE LAND AS ON 1.4.1 981 SHOULD BE RS.50 PER SQ. YARD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ASSESSED THE SA ME AT RS.30 PER SQ. YARD AS ON 1.4.1981 WHICH WAS LATER ENHAN CED TO RS.35 ON APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT ALTHOUGH NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR THE DEPARTMENT COULD FURNISH ANY SALE INSTAN CES IN SUPPORT OF THEIR RESPECTIVE CASES THE LAND WAS ACQUIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT ON 19.1.1991 AT RS.200 PER SQ. YARD WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE F.M.V. OF THE LAND IN QUESTION COULD REA SONABLY BE ASSESSED AT RS.50 PER SQ. YARD AS ON 1.4.1981 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS OPPO SED THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GIVE ANY EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY THE ITA NO.1681/HYD/08 MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN HYDERABAD 3 RATE OF LAND ADOPTED BY HER AND THE CIT(A) HAS ALR EADY GIVEN SUFFICIENT RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE ON THIS COUNT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS FOR THE VALUATION OF THE LAND AS ON 1.4.1981 CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE COMPENSATION UPON ACQUISITION OF THE LAND IN QUESTION ON 19.1.1991 WAS DETERMINED BY THE GOVERNMENT AT RS.200 PER SQUARE YARD AND CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES BEFORE US WE F IND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SALE INSTANCES BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE PAR TIES THAT ENDS OF JUSTICE SHALL BE MET IF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND IN QUESTION AS ON 1.4.1981 IS DETERMINED AT RS.40 PER SQ. YARD AS AGAINST RS.35 PER SQ. YARD DETERMINED BY THE CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN RELATION TO THIS ISSU E ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DETERMIN E THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND IN QUESTION AS ON 1.4.1981 ADOPTING A RATE OF RS.40 PER SQ. YARD.. 6. OTHER ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING THE TAXABILITY OF INTEREST AMOUNT AWARDED FOR THE PERIOD FROM 19.1.1991 TO 10.4.2003 DUE TO LATE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST FOR LATE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION ON ACQUISITION OF LAND BY THE GOVERNMENT PERTAINS TO THE EARLIER YEARS RIGHT FROM 19.1.1991 TO 10.4.2003 AND ACCRUED YEAR AFTER YEAR A ND AS SUCH THE SAME SHOULD BE TAXED AFTER APPORTIONING THE SAME AMONG THE RELEVANT YEARS. HE RELIED ON THE DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE SUPREM E COURT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD. V/S. CIT (229 ITR 383)-SC ITA NO.1681/HYD/08 MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN HYDERABAD 4 AND OF THE HON'BLE GUWAHATI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S. U.M.KIDWAI (219 ITR 130). 8. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAND OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL AND SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ADMITTEDLY NOT MAINTAINING ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND WAS FOLLOWING CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IN RESPECT OF INTERE ST INCOME DECLARED BY HER. HE SUBMITTED THAT NO SUCH ISSUE OF BIFUR CATION OF INTEREST INTO VARIOUS YEARS WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HERSELF HAS AD MITTED THE TAXABILITY OF INTEREST AMOUNT PERTAINING TO PAST YEARS DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ITSELF SINCE T HE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE ENTIRE COMPENSATION INCLUSIVE OF TH E SAID AMOUNT OF INTEREST DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MAINTAINING ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WITH REGARD TO THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED BY HER. ASSESSEE COULD NOT ASSAIL THE FINDING OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES THAT THE ASSESSEE W AS FOLLOWING CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IN RESPECT OF HER INTEREST INCOME . THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSE E IT WAS SEEN THAT SHE WAS FOLLOWING CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IN RESPECT OF INTEREST INCOME AND IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAINED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY INTEREST INCO ME IN HER RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PRECED ING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ON ACCRUAL OR MERCANTILE BASIS. MOREOVER THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE ENTIRE INTEREST INCOME IN THE RETURN FILE D FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS SHE HAS RECEIVED THE ENTIRE COMP ENSATION AMOUNT INCLUSIVE OF INTEREST ONLY DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR UNDER ITA NO.1681/HYD/08 MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN HYDERABAD 5 CONSIDERATION. ASSESSMENTS IN RESPECT OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS HAVE ALSO BECOME TIME BARRED. IN THESE FACTS OF THE CASE WE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IN RESPECT OF INTEREST INCOME THERE WAS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ACTION O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TAXING THE SAID INTEREST INCOME IN THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND CONSEQUENTLY GROUNDS OF APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS BEHALF ARE REJECTED. 10. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 09/04/2010 SD/- SD/- (AKBER BASHA) (G.C.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DT/- 09 APRIL 2010 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. MRS. RUBINA FAIZUDDIN C/O. M/S. M.A. MOHIADDIN & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS 307 LENAINE ESTATE ABID ROAD HYDERABAD 5 00 001. 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 41) HYDERAB AD. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) V HYDERABAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-IV HYDERABAD 5 THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT HYDERABAD. B.V.S.