9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 1019X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x on Madhapur property is admitted and is also remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for consideration in accordance with law. Assessing Officer is also directed to verify the existence of movable assets during the financial year and if they do not exist, then Assessing Officer cannot make any addition in this regard. - WTA Nos. 78 & 79/Hyd/2017 - - - Dated:- 21-4-2021 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi , Judicial Member And Shri A. Mohan Alankamony , Accountant Member Assessee by : Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue by : Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey , DR ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi , J. M. Both are assessee s appeals for the A.Ys 2003-04 2004-05 respectively against the separate orders of the CIT (A)-9, Hyderabad, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT (A) for both the A.Ys, who granted partial relief to the assessee. The assessee is in second appeal before the Tribunal against the confirmation of the additions by the CIT (A) for both the A.Ys by raising the following grounds of appeal which are common except for the quantum of additions: 1 The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in partly allowing the appeal. 3 The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the entire addition of ₹ 2,77,126/- made in respect of land at Banjara Hills. 4 The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the appreciation of 15% in respect of land at Banjara Hills has no basis, whatsoever, and that the addition made is purely on accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rary before making any addition in this regard. 13 The appellant may add or alter or amend or modify or substitute or delete and j or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal . 3. The additional grounds raised by the assessee for both the A.Ys are reproduced below: 14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the plot at Madhapur village with area to the extent of 420 Sq.yds equals to 351.17 Sq. meters is exempted from wealth tax as per section 5(vi) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. 15. As per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) the ITAT has jurisdiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordance with the CBDT Circular No.3, dated 28.9.1957. 5. As regards the Ground No.9 in relation to addition of ₹ 34,61,500/- made towards value of movable properties, he submitted that the assessee had valued the movable properties in the earlier years and even though the movable properties were not in existence during the relevant financial year, the AO has taken the same value into consideration for making an addition this year also. He submitted that the Assessing Officer be directed to delete this addition. 6. The learned DR was also heard, who relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that the CBDT Circular 3, dated 28.9.1957 has given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons made to the buildings or substantial improvements, etc.). If the assessee insists on revaluation in the second or third year, he should, of course, be allowed to lead evidence justifying such revaluation and matter decided on the basis of such evidence. Therefore, the revaluation of the properties at Banjara Hills and Madhapur needs reconsideration by the AO in the light of the CBDT Circular No.3 dated 28.09.1957 above and if the value of the assets was fixed by the Assessing Officer in A.Y 2002-03 in accordance with law, then he has to adopt the same for the next two succeeding A.Ys. The Assessing Officer is directed accordingly. Further, the additional ground raised by the assessee with regard to the chargeability of Wealth Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
