HUSANALI MOHAMMED,RANGA REDDY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIKARABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 279/HYD/2020Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 August 2021AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following its previous order in related appeals, restored the issue to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to determine if the land constituted a capital asset and verify sale dates.

What were the facts?

The assessees, co-sharers of land, were assessed for capital gains on its transfer. Similar appeals by other co-sharers were restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.

What were the issues?

Whether the land in question qualifies as a capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Act and the correct assessment of capital gains.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(14),Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES : BENCH “A” HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 05/07/2021Pronounced: 17/08/2021

For Assessee: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Adv. For Revenue: Sri Lakka Bhushanam, DR Date of Hearing : 05/07/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 17/08/2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M. These are assessee’s appeals against the CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad’s orders dated 20.01.2020 in case nos 10381/2018-19 and 10387/2018-19 and case no. 10384/2018-19 dated 06.01.2020 for AY 2011-12; respectively, .. 275, 276 and 279?hyd/2020 AY 2011-12 Sri Mohmood Mohammed, Rasheed Mohammed, Husanali Mohammed involving proceedings u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ in short ‘the Act’ ].

Heard the assessees represented by Sri K.Sai Prasad, AR and Sri Lakka Bhushanam Ld.DR representing the department.

2.

It emerges at the outset that both the learned lower authorities have assessed all the three instant assessees for having derived capital gains on account of transfer of land at survey nos. 100 and 107 Mokilaa village, Shankarpalli Mandal, R.R.Dt. (TS). We next note that all these three assessees are co-sharers in this said land and this tribunal’s “SMC” bench common order dated 4.2.2021 in ITA 269 to 274 and 277 and 278/Hyd/2020 filed by the other co-sharers, has restored the very issue back to the file of Assessing officer to determine as to whether the land(s) herein formed capital asset(s) u/s 2(14) of the Act. The Assessing officer has further been directed to verify the assessees that these lands had been sold in subsequent AYs. Faced with this situation, we deem it fit and proper to issue the same directions to the Assessing officer by adopting judicial consistency.

3.

These assessees or their authorised representatives are directed to appear before the Assessing officer on or before 30th November, 2021 with all the relevant evidence to this effect, at their own risk and responsibility followed by three effective opportunities of hearing. These three assessees appeals are accepted for statistical purposes in above terms. Pronounced in Open Court on 17th August 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: the 17th August, 2021. * gmv .. 275, 276 and 279?hyd/2020 AY 2011-12 Sri Mohmood Mohammed, Rasheed Mohammed, Husanali Mohammed

More judgments on Section 2(14)

All 1,130 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(14) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →