9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to A.O. to determine the fair market value including the DVO value. Therefore also, we are of the opinion that there is no mistake which require rectification. - M.A. No. 81, 82 /Hyd/2015, ITA. No. 1269/Hyd/2012, ITA. No. 1428/Hyd/2012 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2015 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member For the Petitioner : Mr. K. C. Devdas For the Respondent : Mr. Ramakrishna Bandi ORDER Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J. M. These two M.As are filed against the common order of this Tribunal dated 31.07.2013 in ITA.No.1428/Hyd/2012 and ITA.No.1269/Hyd/2012. 2. In both of these M.As., the assessee is aggrieved by the directions of this Tribunal in para-21 of its order wherein a reference to the DVO has been directed to be made by the A.O. and also to consider the report of the DVO on the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the assessee had already filed M.A.No.223/Hyd/2013 in ITA.No.1428/Hyd/2012 which has been dismissed by this Tribunal vide orders dated 03.02.2014 holding that there was no mistake apparent from record for rectification. It was submitted that subsequen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income Tax Department as there was no provisions in the statute to make a reference to the Valuation Cell to determine the cost of acquisition of the property as on 01.04.1981. This decision of the Jurisdictional HC which was brought to the notice of the Tribunal is binding and therefore the order calls for rectification. 8. Binding value of a Co-ordinate Bench: Decision of a co-ordinate bench. - In CIT v Travancore Titanium Products Ltd [265 ITR page 526(Ker)] wherein the High Court ruled that a bench of the Tribunal was not justified in distinguishing an earlier decision of a different Bench, even if it were wrong. The High Court pointed out to the observation of the Supreme Court in Sub- Inspector Roopal v Lt. Governor, (1 sec 644) where the Supreme Court expressed serious dissatisfaction of one Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal disregarding the view taken by another Bench pointing out that respect for the precedents is the foundation of administration of justice under our system and that only a larger Bench can overrule an earlier decision. It was felt that it is a matter of judicial discipline even as between Benches of the High Courts and the Supre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.1981 for computation of capital gains. We find that the very same issue has been raised by the assessee in MA.No.223/Hyd/2013 though in the Revenue s appeal 1428/Hyd/2012 and this Tribunal after considering the decisions cited by the assessee before us now i.e., the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ashven Datla in ITTA.No.111 of 2012 dated 26.11.2012 as well as the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Sri Narsimha Rao (HUF), Hyderabad in ITA.No.1240/Hyd/2007 dated 26.09.2008, has held that there was no mistake apparent from record which needs rectification. The relevant portion of the Tribunal s order in MA.No.223/Hyd/2013 in ITA.No.1428/Hyd/2012 is reproduced hereunder : 2. The learned counsel for the applicant-assessee, reiterating the averments made in the present application, invited our attention to one of the grounds in the appeal of the assessee, viz. to the effect that the CIT(A) ought to have adopted the value of the property as on 1.4.81 before indexation ₹ 1600 per sq. yard for land aggregating to ₹ 38,17,647 and cost of the building as on 1.4.81 before indexation at ₹ 2,01,1252 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 26.11.2012, which implies that the aforesaid decision has been approved by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal ion its order dated 31.7.2013 erred in relying on the decisions of Mumbai and Delhi Benches of the Tribunal, though the same have not been cited by either of the parties. Learned counsel for the assessee also referred to the decision of the Kerala high Court in the case of CIT V/s. Travancore Titaanium Products Ltd. (265 ITR 526), in support of his contentions on the binding nature of the decisions of the coordinate bench. The learned counsel for the assessee, thus submitted that there is mistake in the order of the Tribunal dated 31.7.2013 and consequently the same is liable to be rectified/recalled. 3. The Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that there is no mistake apparent from record in the order of the Tribunal dated 31.7.2013 and the present applciationof the assee is liable to eb rejected, as it is devoid of merit. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the order of the Tribunal dated 31.7.2013 in the light of the material available on record and the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ost of acquisition of the property . 4.2. The order of ITAT in ITA.No.1428/Hyd/2012 and ITA.No.1269/Hyd/2012 dated 31st July, 2013 in para 21 and 22 are as under : 21. Therefore, in our opinion, the A.O. should consider the following : 1. The registered valuer report as submitted by the assessee. 2. Reference to the DVO has to be made by the A.O. and the report of the DVO on the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 of the property has to be considered. 3. Inherent quality of the property namely size, location, road frontage, corner plot, if any, etc. to be examined. 4. Any comparable property in the same locality should be taken for consideration. 22. Thereafter, the A.O. shall after examining thoroughly the nature of the property and the peculiar circumstances as well as the values given by the different persons namely DVO and the Registered Valuer shall decide the issue denovo. It is needless to say that a reasonable opportunity of being heard should be given to the assessee. 4.3. As can be seen the ITAT has not directed A.O. to adopt value of DVO as apprehended. Various options were given to A.O. to determine the fair market value in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
