ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI v. SURINDERSINGH D.KAMBOW, MUMBAI

ITA 4854/MUM/2014 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2016 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 485419914 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AFFPK5876G
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4854/MUM/2014
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
Appellant ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI
Respondent SURINDERSINGH D.KAMBOW, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted E
Tribunal Order Date 04-10-2016
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 22-07-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) ITA NO. 4854/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 THE IT O (IT) - 3 (1) ROOM NO. 114 1 ST FLOOR SCINDIA HOUSE BALLARD PIER N.M.ROAD MUMBAI- 400 038. VS. MR. SURINDERSINGH D. KAMBOW B/4 INDU PARK 4 BANGAKOW N. DATTA MARG ANDHERI (W) MUMBAI- 400 053. PAN- AFFPK5876G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. SUMAN KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING: 04/10 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04/10/201 6 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAI NST ORDER DATED 10/01/2014 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(APPEALS)-10 MUMBAI FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER O N FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS:- 1. 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING A.O TO ALLOW THE C LAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 54F WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT ; 2 ITA NO. 4854/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 A. THE FLATS ARE STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT TWO FLATS CONSTITUTE ONE HOUSE PROPERT Y. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF K C KAUSHIK VS. PB RANE F IFTH ITO 84 CTR 62 WHEREIN IT WAS CLEARLY CONCLUDED THAT IF ASS ESSEE PURCHASES TWO HOUSE PROPERTIES HE CAN CLAIM EXEMPT ION U/S 54 AGAINST ANY ONE OF THE PROPERTIES. B. THE BUILDER CANNOT ALTER THE BMCS APPROVED PLAN WITHOUT GETTING PRIOR PERMISSION. 3. WE NOTICE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS B ELOW RS.10 00 000/- AND AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 DATED 10/12/2015 THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRL Y ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW RS. 10 LACS. 4. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN APPEAL DOES NOT FALL UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS SPECIFIED IN PARA 8 OF THE CIRCULAR. SIN CE IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR AFORESAID THAT THE INSTRU CTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS; THE PRESENT APPEAL FILE D BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. WE THEREFORE DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 TH OCTOBER 2016 SD/- SD/- ( B.R.BASKARAN ) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 04/10/2016 3 ITA NO. 4854/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 / 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. / BY ORDER ) //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI PRAMILA