Avail 20% discount on updated CA lectures for Dec 21 .Use Code RESULT20 !! Call : 088803-20003

ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Provisions of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act for computation of Capital Gains

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Hyderabad

Brief :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT (A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0090/CIT(A)(-1/Hyd/2016-17/2017-18, dated 23/10/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act for the AY 2010-11.

Citation :
ITA No. 363/Hyd/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD

BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY,
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 363/Hyd/2018

AY: 2010-11
Dr. Mumtaz Ali Khan Afzal,
Hyderabad.
PAN: AEUPK 2328 H
(Appellant) 

VS. 

Income Tax Officer,
Ward-4(2),
Hyderabad.
(Respondent)

Assessee by: Shri A.V. Raghuram
Revenue by: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR

Date of hearing: 08/03/2021
Date of pronouncement: 14/06/2021

ORDER

PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT (A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0090/CIT(A)(-1/Hyd/2016-17/2017-18, dated 23/10/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act for the AY 2010-11.

The assessee has raised three grounds in his appeal however, they are extracted herein below for reference:-

“1. The order of the Ld. CIT (A) confirming the action of the AO adopting value by invoking provisions of section 50C for computation of capital gains is not only erroneous both on facts and in law but is contrary to the principles laid down by the judicial forums.

2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not appreciating the facts that are presented relating to the arguments entered into in 2006 and not considering the subsequent events and thereby erred in upholding the rate as per SRO of 2009 of Rs. 5,15,88,000/- though it is held by the Tribunals that only the rate at the time of agreement should be considered even U/s. 50C and thereby erred in confirming the order of the AO.

3. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.”

3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that there is a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee’s Counsel had submitted a petition for condonation of delay wherein the reasons for filing the appeal beyond the prescribed time limit was explained. For reference, the relevant portion from the affidavit is extracted herein below: -

“2……………It is submitted that though the appeal was kept ready for filing on 5/2/2018, since the challan was not depicting that the institution fee was paid under the sub-head “others”, I have kept the filing of appeal pending to file the same along with Form 26AS for the relevant Asst. Year which would show the head under which the payment was made. However, as the matter is relatively new and as I was preoccupied with the stay matters before departmental Authorities, I lost sight of the fact that the appeal has to be filed along with Form 26AS as the file got mixed up with other batch files. It was only on 21/2/2018 when the assessee requested to send the acknowledgement of the appeal filed, I realized that the same was not filed and immediately on 22/2/2018 the appeal was filed before the Hon’ble Tribunal. However, by the time the appeal was filed there was a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.”

4. On perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee’s Counsel We find that the delay of 11 days in filing of the assessee’s appeal before the Tribunal has occurred due to the oversight of the assessee’s Counsel for which the assessee should not be panelised. Therefore, in the interest 

To know more in details find the attachment file

 

Guest
on 23 June 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 22
downloaded 9 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags