ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Y VENKATA RAMANA, VISAKHAPATNAM

आदेश / O R D E R

PER Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Judicial Member:

These appeals filed by the revenue are directed against orders of

the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 {CIT(A)}, Visakhapatnam

vide ITA Nos.203&204/2015-16/AC,C-2(1),VSP/2017-18 dated

29.11.2017 for the assessment year 2010-11. Since, the facts are

identical and issues are common, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed-off by way of this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The only effective common ground raised by the revenue in these

appeals is that the CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessment

order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act,

1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') is erroneous. Since the facts and

issues are common in both the appeals except difference in figures, we

take ITA No.14/Vizag/2018 for adjudication for the sake of convenience.

income on 30.7.2010 for the assessment year 2010-11 declaring total

income of ` 49,69,760/- by claiming deductions of ` 50,00,000/- u/s

54EC of the Act and ` 1,42,64,624/- u/s 54F of the Act. The case was

selected for scrutiny and the A.O. completed the assessment u/s 143(3)

of the Act accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the CIT-1,

ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP Visakhapatnam passed order u/s 263 of the Act by setting aside the

order passed u/s 143(3) and directed the A.O. to disallow the claim of

exemption u/s 54EC and 54F of the Act after an opportunity of hearing

to the assessee. Consequent to the above, the A.O. issued show cause

notice asking the assessee to substantiate the claim for deduction u/s

54F and 54EC of the Act. Accordingly, the A.O. disallowed the deduction

claimed by the assessee from the long term capitals of ` 50,00,000/- u/s

54EC and ` 1,42,64,424/- u/s 54F of the Act respectively and the A.O.

thus completed the assessment by determining the total income at `

2,43,44,187/-

CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the order of the ITAT in ITA

Nos.177 & 178/Vizag/2015 dated 9.12.2016, allowed the appeals of the

assessees.

D.R. strongly relied on the grounds of appeal and the orders passed by

the A.O.

were quashed by the Hon’ble ITAT vide order (supra) and also quashed

by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, therefore, the orders

passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act has no legs to stand. 3

ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available

on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In

these cases, the orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act were quashed by

the CIT by passing an order u/s 263 of the Act holding that the

assessments are erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the

revenue. Based on the directions of CIT, the A.O. has completed

assessments by giving effect to the orders passed u/s 263 of the Act.

On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) by considering the orders passed by the

coordinate bench of this Tribunal in ITA Nos.177 & 178/Vizag/2015

dated 9.12.2016 (against the order passed by CIT u/s 263 of the Act)

quashed the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, since the

orders passed by the CIT u/s 263 of the Act were quashed by the ITAT

as well as the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court.

infirmity in the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A), hence, needs no

interference. Therefore, we restore the assessment orders passed by

the A.O. u/s 143(3) of the Act.

ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. 9. The above order was pronounced in the open court on 22nd Mar’18.

Sd/- Sd/- (बी आर बासकारन) (धुवु आर. एल. रे!डी) (B.R. BASKARAN) (DUVVURU R.L. REDDY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #या$यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER #वशाखापटणम /Visakhapatnam: 'दनांक /Dated : 22.03.2018 VG/SPS आदेश क� ��त)ल#प अ*े#षत/Copy of the order forwarded to:-