HARI VENKAT, MUMBAI v. ITO 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 4887/MUM/2011 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 488719914 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AANPI8393M
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4887/MUM/2011
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant HARI VENKAT, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 19(3)(4), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-09-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted H
Tribunal Order Date 23-09-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 17-06-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIB UNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL AM AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO JM ITA NO.4887/MUM/2011 : ASST.YEAR 2006-2007 SHRI HARI VENKAT B-212 CHAR DHAM CHS LIMITED ROAD NO.1 TPS IV BANDRA (WEST) MUMBAI 400 050. PAN : AANPI8393M. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(3)(4) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.GOPAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.C.MAURYA DATE OF HEARING : 21.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :23.09.2011 O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON 25.04.2011 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED THROUGH VARIOUS GROUNDS IS AGAINST THE TREATMENT OF RS.20 LAKH RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON PARTITION OF H.VENKATESHWARAN (HUF) AS GIFT CHARGEABLE TO TAX. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THIS CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEES CAPITAL ACCOUNT WAS CREDITED WITH A SUM OF RS.20 LA KH RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR ON ACCOUNT OF PARTITION OF H.VENKATESHWARAN (HUF). ON THE PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO PARTITION IN TH E SAID HUF TILL THE DATE OF PASSING OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT WAS ALSO NOTICE D THAT APPLICATION FOR THE PARTITION OF HUF WAS MADE AFTER THE EVIDENCE OF PAR TITION WAS CALLED FOR BY HIM DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE KARTA OF THI S HUF PASSED AWAY ON 08.09.1993 AND AFTER THAT THE RETURNS OF INCOME OF THE SAID HUF WERE FILED TILL THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 BY THE ASSESSEES MOTHER MRS. SUDHA V IYER AS MANAGER OF THE HUF. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THERE WAS NO PARTITION OF ITA NO.4887/MUM/2011 SHRI HARI VENKAT. 2 HUF. AS SUCH THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.20 LAKH WAS HELD TO BE GIFT CHARGEABLE TO TAX AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . NO RELIEF WAS ALLOWED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD IT IS NOTICED THAT THE CASE OF SMT.SUDHA V.I YER THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR AND ON IDENTICAL FACTS HAVING SIMILAR GROUNDS OF APPEAL CAME UP ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN WHICH ALSO THE A.O. RECORDED SIMILAR FINDING. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 14.09.2011 IN ITA NO.4886/MUM/2011 HAS HELD VIDE PARA 16 THAT THE M ONEY WAS RECEIVED BY HER AS COPARCENER AND TOWARDS HER SHARE OF THE PROPERTIES OF THE HUF ON PARTITION OF HUF. SUCH EQUAL AMOUNT HAS BEEN HELD TO BE NOT TAXA BLE THEREBY ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THAT ASSESSEE. NO DISTINGUISHING FEATURE COULD BE POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE VIS--VIS THOSE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE AFORE-SAID CASE. ON THE CONTRARY THE LEARNED A.R. STRONGLY RELIED ON THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL B Y SUBMITTING THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF BOTH THE CASES ARE SIMILAR. IN VIE W OF THESE FACTS AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES WE OVERTURN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND O RDER FOR THE DELETION OF ADDITION. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 23 RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2011. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI : 23 RD SEPTEMBER 2011. DEVDAS* ITA NO.4887/MUM/2011 SHRI HARI VENKAT. 3 COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - XXX MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI.