Sri. Sanjay Mahesh Sha, Bengaluru v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 12(3), Bangalore

ITA 2066/BANG/2019 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2021 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 206621114 RSA 2019
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number ITA 2066/BANG/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Sri. Sanjay Mahesh Sha, Bengaluru
Respondent The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 12(3), Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-08-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 31-08-2021
Date Of Final Hearing 27-08-2021
Next Hearing Date 27-08-2021
Last Hearing Date 03-08-2020
First Hearing Date 07-01-2020
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 25-09-2019
Judgment Text
ITA NO.2066/BANG/2019 PAGE 2 OF 6 PROPERTY AT 246/83 SURVEY NO.83 AMMANI BELANDUR K HAVE VILLAGE VARTHUR HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK VIDE REGISTERED DEED DA TED 15/06/2011 AND THE INVESTMENT IN THE LAND WAS RS.6 64 54 770/- TILL TH E DATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN. FT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING ON THE ABOVE SITE HAD BEEN COMPLETED IN APRIL 2013. AFTER SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES GRANTED BY THE AO TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM FOR EXE MPTION OF CAPITAL GAINS U/S 54F THE AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A DUPLIC ATE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION DATED 10/04/2013 FROM THE ARCHITECT MS. KAJAL GUPTA STATING THAT THE BUILDING HAD BEEN COMPLETED AS PER THE SAN CTION PLAN APPROVED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING BBMP MAHA DEVAPURA ZONE. THE AR WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE COMPLETION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AUTHORITIES BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. 3. THEREAFTER THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 133(6) OF T HE ACT TO THE BBMP REQUESTING FOR DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESID ENTIAL HOUSE OF THE APPELLANT. THE AO ALSO DEPUTED HER INSPECTOR FOR A SITE VISIT WHO WAS ACCOMPANIED BY AN OFFICIAL OF THE BBMP. THE INSPECT OR IN HIS REPORT SUBMITTED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOUSE WAS ST ILL IN PROGRESS AND THAT THE HOUSE WAS NOT FIT FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE. THE AO RECEIVED REPLIES DATED 14/03/2014 AND 20/03/2014 FROM THE JOINT COMMISSION ER BBMP MAHADEVAPURA IN WHICH IT WAS STATED THAT THE BUILDI NG WAS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND NO COMPLETION CERTIFICATE HAD BEEN ISSUED BY THEM. SUBSEQUENTLY SUMMONS WERE ISSUED BY THE AO TO BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND THE ARCHITECT AND THEIR STATEMENTS WERE RECORDED ON OATH. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT A ONE-BEDROOM HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN ITIALLY AND THEN DUE TO SOME REASON IT WAS DEMOLISHED AND NEW CONSTRUCT ION STARTED FROM OCTOBER 2013. THE SAME VERSION OF EVENTS WAS CORROB ORATED BY THE ARCHITECT IN HER STATEMENT. HOWEVER THE AO NOTED T HAT THE ARCHITECT HAVING RECENTLY STARTED HER CONSULTANCY FIRM WOULD NOT HA VE CONTRADICTED THE ASSESSEE FOR RISK OF LOSING A BIG CLIENT. FROM THE DETAILS SUBMITTED THE AO