ACIT 26(1), MUMBAI v. SHANKARAN B NAIR, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 3039/MUM/2017 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2021 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 303919914 RSA 2017
Assessee PAN ABGPN5289B
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 3039/MUM/2017
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant ACIT 26(1), MUMBAI
Respondent SHANKARAN B NAIR, NAVI MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted J
Tribunal Order Date 09-03-2021
Last Hearing Date 15-01-2019
First Hearing Date 28-12-2020
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 27-04-2017
Judgment Text
THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH MUMBAI SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) & SHRI RAMLAL NEGI (JM) I.T.A. NO. 3039/MUM/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12) ACIT-26(1) ROOM NO. 701 C-11 7 TH FLOOR BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA EAST MUMBAI-400 051. VS. SHANKARAN B. NAIR 412 THACKER TOWER VASHI NAVI MUMBAI- 400 0703. PAN : ABGPN5289B ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI T.S. KHALSA DATE OF HEARING 08.03.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09.03.2021 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) :- THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST OR DER OF LEARNED CIT-A DATED 16.1.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 1-12. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER :- I. 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.67 66 865/- MADE U/S 54 OF THE IT ACT HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 54 PROPORTIONATELY IN RESPECT OF THE PAYMENTS TOWARDS P URCHASE OF NEW PROPERTY MADE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT.' II) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT NEITHER THE DAT E OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT NOR THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT (OF THE NEW HOUSE PROPERTY) WAS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR BEFORE OR TWO YEARS AFTER THE DATE OF TRANSFER OF HOUSE PROPERTY SPECIFIED IN SECTION 54(1) OF THE IT ACT 1961.' III) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D ALSO NOT TAKEN THE POSSESSION OF THE NEW FLAT WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIO D AND THAT THE DEDUCTION U/S. 54 CANNOT BE GRANTED EVEN ON PROPORTION ATE BASIS AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FULFILLED THE MANDATORY CONDITION PRE SCRIBED FOR CLAIMING THIS DEDUCTION.' SHANKARAN B. NAIR 2 IV) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.7 00 00 0/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CAPITAL GAIN IGNORING THAT THE ASSESSEE H AD FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS OF EXPLAINING THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THIS S UM RECEIVED BY HIM.' V) 'THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT ( A) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED.' 3. AT THE OUTSET IT IS NOTED THAT THAT THE TAX EFFE CT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW THE LIMIT OF RS. 50 00 000/- FIXED BY CBDT VIDE CIRCULA R NO. 17/2019 DATED 8/8/2019 FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE 1TAT. HENCE T HIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. LD DR COULD NOT DISPUTE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS B ELOW THE SAID LIMIT. HE COULD NOT POINT OUT THAT THE APPEAL FALLS IN ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS CARVED IN SAID CIRCULAR. 5. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE FIND THAT AS THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW THE LIMIT FIXED BY CBDT FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE I TAT THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. THE RE VENUE WILL HAVE LIBERTY TO SEEK RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL IF THE TAX EFFECT IS FOUND TO BE BEYOND THE ABOVE LIMIT. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED AS S UCH. 6. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9.3.2021. SD/- SD/- (RAMALAL NEGI) (SHAMIM YAH YA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 09/03/2021 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. SHANKARAN B. NAIR 3 BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) PS ITAT MUMBAI