THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), , VIJAYAWADA vs. IVATURI MAHALAKSHMI, , VIJAYAWADA
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the assesee’s Cross Objection is allowed
ITA 509/VIZ/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Jul 2022AY 2006-07
Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.509/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Ivaturi Mallikharjuan Rao, Ward-2(2), L/R & Son Of Late Smt. Vijayawada. Ivaturi Mahalakshmamma, Vijayawada. Pan: Aatpi 0474 P (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) Co. No.18/Viz/2019 (In आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.509/Viz/2018) (ननधधारण वषा / Ay : 2006-07) Sri Ivaturi Mallikharjuan Rao, Vs. Income Tax Officer, L/R & Son Of Late Smt. Ivaturi Ward-2(2), Mahalakshmamma, Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aatpi 0474 P (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Revenue By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 08/07/2022 Pronouncement
For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)Section 48Section 50C
section 50C of the IT Act, which is mandatory when the value adopted by SRO is higher than the actual consideration received by the assessee.
4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the specific SRO rates given vide certificate dated 11/11/2009 in respect of the assessee’s premises at D.No. 38-8-7, MG Road,
Vijayawada.
5. Taking