Srinivas Punnamaraju, Hyderabad v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(3), Hyderabad

ITA 1744/Hyd/2017 | 2013-2014
Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 174422514 RSA 2017
Assessee PAN AMTPP7662C
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1744/Hyd/2017
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant Srinivas Punnamaraju, Hyderabad
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(3), Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB-B
Tribunal Order Date 11-11-2019
Date Of Final Hearing 04-11-2019
Next Hearing Date 04-11-2019
Last Hearing Date 21-08-2018
First Hearing Date 16-05-2018
Assessment Year 2013-2014
Appeal Filed On 18-10-2017
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES SMC HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1744/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SRI SRINIVAS PUNNAMARAJU HYDERABAD [PAN: AMTPP7662C] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(3) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM AR FOR REVENUE : SMT. MATTA PADMA DR DATE OF HEARING : 04-11-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-11-2019 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE AY.2013-14 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS)1 HYDERABAD DATED 27-09-2016. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING LOS S UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY OF RS.11 74 755/- . THE ABOVE E-RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED U/ S.143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT [ACT] AND INTIMATION WAS ISSUED WHEREIN THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY HAS BEEN TAKEN AS SEL F- OCCUPIED AS AGAINST THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF THE PROPE RTY BEING LET-OUT AND ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION OF ONLY RS.1 50 000/-. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE THIS MISTAKE PROBABLY HAPPEN ED ON ACCOUNT OF SOFTWARE PROBLEM WHEREIN THE LET-OUT PROPE RTY HAS BEEN TAKEN AS SELF-OCCUPIED AND THE DEDUCTION OF CL AIM U/S.24 OF THE ACT TOWARDS INTEREST PAYMENT ON HOUSING LO AN WAS RESTRICTED TO RS.1 50 000/-. WHEN THE ASSESSEE TRIE D TO GET ITA NO. 1744/HYD/2017 :- 2 -: IT RECTIFIED ASSESSEE WAS ADVISED TO APPROACH THE LOCA L ASSESSING OFFICER (AO). ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSEE FI LED RECTIFICATION PETITION U/S.154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE AO WHO HOWEVER HELD THAT THERE WAS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AS THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS CLAIMED THE PROPERTY AS SELF- OCCUPIED AND THEREFORE IS NOT ALLOWABLE. 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFOR E THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO AND THE ASSESSE E IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW HAS DRAWN MY ATTENTION TO THE ASSESSEES SUBMISS IONS BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT THE INTEREST CERTIFICATES ARE ISSUED BY THE SBI AND ING VYSYA BANK ON HOME LOANS AND ALSO DREW MY ATTENTION TO THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSE E WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FR OM HOUSE PROPERTY. HE SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE AUTHORITIES F AILED TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE. 5. LD.DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT LOAN HAS BEEN TAKEN BY TWO PERSONS INCLUDING THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WHER EAS THE ENTIRE INTEREST PAYMENT HAS BEEN CLAIMED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ALONE. IN REBUTTAL LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE NAME OF THE WIFE WAS ADDED TO THE PROPERTY ONLY FOR THE NAME SAKE AND SHE IS NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND SHE HAS NEITHER FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME NOR HAS CLAIME D INTEREST ITA NO. 1744/HYD/2017 :- 3 -: EXPENDITURE IN HER HANDS. HE HAS ALSO DRAWN MY ATTENTI ON TO THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE WIFE OF ASSESSEE SMT.VAIJAY ANTHI PUNNAMARAJU TO THIS EFFECT. 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD I AM OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT IT IS A LET-OUT PROPERTY AND THEREFORE IS ENTITLED TO SET-OFF THE INTEREST PAYMENT OF HOUSING LOAN HAS TO BE ALLOWED. AS REGARDS THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS THE SOLE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE THE ENTIRE INTEREST AMOUNT IS TO B E ALLOWED IN HIS HANDS HAS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO. T HUS THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE APPARE NT FROM RECORD AND NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE AO. TH EREFORE I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE AO OUGHT NOT TO HAVE REJECTED THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER U/S.154 OF THE AC T AND REMAND THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF AO WITH A DIRECTIO N TO CONSIDER AND EXAMINE THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALLOW THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE U/S.24 OF THE ACT IN ACCO RDANCE WITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH NOVEMBER 2019 SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD DATED: 11-11-2019 TNMM ITA NO. 1744/HYD/2017 :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1. SRI SRINIVAS PUNNAMARAJU C/O. K.VASANT KUMAR A.V.RAGHU RAM P.VINOD & M.NEELIMA DEVI ADVOCATES 610 BABUKHAN ESTATE BASHEERBAGH HYDERABAD. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(3) HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(APPEALS)-1 HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT-1 HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.