Kamlesh Konodia , Hyderabad v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(2), Hyderabad

ITA 2112/Hyd/2018 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 211222514 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AHSPK2820K
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 2112/Hyd/2018
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant Kamlesh Konodia , Hyderabad
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(2), Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-05-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB-B
Tribunal Order Date 11-05-2021
Date Of Final Hearing 07-04-2021
Next Hearing Date 07-04-2021
Last Hearing Date 23-03-2020
First Hearing Date 10-09-2020
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 02-11-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2112/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 KAMLESH KANODIA HYDERABAD [PAN: AHSPK2820K] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-11(2) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : NONE FOR REVENUE : SHRI ROHIT MUJUMDAR DR DATE OF HEARING : 07-04-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-05-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA J.M. : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY.2010-11 ARISES FROM TH E CIT(A)-5 HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 24-07-2018 PASSED IN APPEAL NO.0371/2017-18/CIT(A)-5 INVOLVING PROCEEDI NGS U/S.144 R.W.S.147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHO RT THE ACT]. CASE CALLED TWICE. NONE APPEARED AT ASSESSEES BEHE ST. HE IS ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED EX-PARTE. 2. IT TRANSPIRES AT THE OUTSET THAT THIS ASSESSEES INSTANT APPEAL SUFFERS FROM 27 DAYS DELAY STATED TO BE ATTRIBUTAB LE TO THE REASON(S) BEYOND HIS CONTROL AS PER CONDONATION ITA NO. 2112/HYD/2018 :- 2 -: PETITION/AFFIDAVIT DT.20-02-2019. NO REBUTTAL HAS COME F ROM THE DEPARTMENTAL SIDE. THE IMPUGNED DELAY IS CONDONED THEREFORE. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS IN THE INSTANT APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS & IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING EX-PARTE ORDER DISM ISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING ANY FURTHER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEA RD AFTER THE SPECIFIED DATE. 2. ON THE FACTS & IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN RELYING UPON THE A.OS ORDE R CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.15 61 609/- BEING THE CAPITAL GAIN A RRIVED BY CONSIDERING THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OF RS. 30 56 000/- (ASSESSEES SHARE BEING 50%) WHEREAS THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD VIDE DOCUMENT NO 286/2010 REGISTERED WITH SRO KUKATPALL Y FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.17 12 000/- (ASSESSEES SHARE BEING 50 % I.E. 8 56 000/-). THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE TOTAL ADDITION OF CAPITAL G AIN WITHOUT VERIFYING THE DETAILS. 3. ON THE FACTS & IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED BY RELYING UPON THE A.OS ORDE R FOR NOT CONSIDERING THE INVESTMENT MADE IN RESIDENTIAL PROP ERTY DURING THE SAID YEAR FOR CLAIMING THE EXEMPTION U/S.54 FROM CAPITAL GAINS. 4. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET WITH THE ABLE ASSISTANCE FROM TH E REVENUES SIDE THAT BOTH THE LEARNED AUTHORITIES HAVE PROCEEDED TO INVOKE SECTION 50C FOR MAKING LONG TERM C APITAL GAIN ADDITION OF RS.25 20 247/- INVOLVING THE ASSESS EES HALF SHARE COMING TO RS.12 60 124/-. THERE IS NO DISPUTE QUA THE BASIC FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INDEED TRANSFERRED CAP ITAL ASSET I.E. AN AREA MEASURING 400 SQ. YDS. FROM PLO T NO.14 AND 28 SQ. YDS. FROM PLOT NO.15; IN THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR (SITUATED IN FATHE NAGAR VILLAGE BALA NAGAR MANDAL KUKATPALLY HYDERABAD) VIDE SALE DOCUMENT NO.286/2010 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.17 12 000/- AS AGAINST SRO PRICE OF ITA NO. 2112/HYD/2018 :- 3 -: RS.30 56 000/-. AND ALSO THAT NEITHER OF THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES MADE SECTION 50C(2) STATUTORY REFERENCE TO THE DVO HELD TO BE MANDATORY AS PER HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURTS DECISION SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL VS. CIT (2014) [372 IT R 83] (CAL). 5. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES ONLY ARGUMENT IS THAT NO SUCH PLEA HAD BEEN RAISED FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE INSTANT ARGUMENT SINCE THE SAM E ALREADY STAND DECLINED IN THE FOREGOING JUDICIAL PREC EDENT. WE ACCORDINGLY ACCEPT THE ASSESSEES TWIN SUBSTANTIVE GR IEVANCES FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R TO PROCEED AFRESH AS PER LAW IN ABOVE TERMS. 7. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH MAY 2021 SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.G ODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD DATED: 11-05-2021 TNMM ITA NO. 2112/HYD/2018 :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1.KAMLESH KANODIA VILLA NO.93 SAPALY MEADOWS GUNDLAPOCHAMPALLY MEDCHAL HYDERABAD. 2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-11(2) HYDERABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-5 HYDERABAD. 4.PR.CIT-5 HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.