ITO 20(2)(2), MUMBAI v. NARENDRA R. KENIA (HUF), MUMBAI

ITA 556/MUM/2016 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 55619914 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AAAHN8918C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 556/MUM/2016
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 18 day(s)
Appellant ITO 20(2)(2), MUMBAI
Respondent NARENDRA R. KENIA (HUF), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Department
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted Not Allotted
Tribunal Order Date 22-11-2017
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 04-02-2016
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 556/MUM/2016 : A.Y : 2011 - 12 ITO - 20(2)( 2 ) MUMBAI (APPELLANT) VS. NARENDRA R. KENIA (HUF) 699 2 ND FLOOR CHANDRA VILLA DR. DINSHAW MASTER ROAD PARSI COLONY DADAR (E) MUMBAI 400 014 (RESPONDENT) PAN : AAAHN8918C APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.A. KHAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MEHUL SHAH DATE OF HEARING : 22 / 11 /2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 /11/2017 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU AM : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 32 MUMBAI DATED 02.11.2015 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUMBAI DATED 29.03.2014 U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2 ITA NO. 556/MUM/2016 NARENDRA R. KENIA (HUF) 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT WAS A COMMON POINT BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANJULA SHAH 3 55 ITR 474 (BOM.) WHICH HAS BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE CIT(A) FOR ALLOWING THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE CONTINUES TO HOLD THE FIELD AND HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED BY ANY HIGHER AUTHORITY AND THEREFORE THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE AFFIRMED. SO HOWEVE R IN ORDER TO IMPART COMPLETENESS TO THE ORDER THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION IS RELEVANT. 3. THE RESPONDENT - ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD DECLARED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF A PROPERTY BEARING NO. 699 DR. DINSHAW MASTER ROAD PARSI COLONY DADAR MUMBAI 400 014 DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE FACTS RELEVANT FOR THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY BY INHERITANCE IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1996 - 97 THOUGH THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO 1 .4.1981. AS A CONSEQUENCE THE ASSESSEE ADOPTED THE INDEXATION FACTOR OF THE YEAR 1980 - 81 FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE INDEXED COST OF ACQUISITION WHEREAS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALLOWED THE INDEXATION WITH REFERENCE TO THE INDEXATION FACTOR FOR F INANCI AL Y EAR 1996 - 97 WHEN ASSESSEE ACTUALLY INHERITED/ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY. THE CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE BY RELYING ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE MANJULA SHAH (SUPRA) . SINCE THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBA Y HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANJULA SHAH (SUPRA) SQUARELY COVERS THE CONTROVERSY WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) WHICH IS HEREBY AFFIRMED. 3 ITA NO. 556/MUM/2016 NARENDRA R. KENIA (HUF) 4. RESULTANTLY APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 22 ND NOVEMBER 2017. SD/ - SD/ - ( RAVISH SOOD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI DATE : 2 2 N D NOVEMBER 201 7 *SSL* COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R B BENCH MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T MUMBAI