Ita/380/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Sri M A Patel (Sri Madhu Bai R Patel)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF AUGUST, 2014. PRESENT THR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THR HON’BLE MRS..JUSTICK RATHNAKALA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.38QO OF 201 BETWEEN: 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,C.R. BUILDING, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2.THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(3), C.R. BUILDING,WARD-4(3), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE.| .. APPELLANT (BY SRI G.KAMALADHAR, ADV.) AND: ORI. M.A.PATEL (SRI.MADHU BAI R.PATEL), NO.321, 3 MAIN, 4 CROSS,J.P.NAGAR 3 PHASE, |BANGALORE — 560 078. SINCK DEAD REP. BY LRS: 1.MRS. NAINABEN N.PATEL) R/AT# 321, 3 MAIN, 4 CROSS, J.P.NAGAR, 3 PHASE, | BANGALORE —- 560 078. 2.MRS. SMITABBN M.PATEL R/AT# 321, 3 MAIN, 4 CROSS, J.P.NAGAR, 3 PHASE, | BANGALORE — 560 078. 3.MR.SHAILBSH M.PATELR/AT# 321, 3 MAIN, 4 CROSS,J.P.NAGAR, 3 PHASE, |R/AT# 321, 3 MAIN, 4 CROSS,J.P.NAGAR, 3 PHASE, | BANGALORE — 560 078. _ RBSPONDENTS (BY SRI PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) THIS INCOMB TAX APPKAL [IS FILED UNDERSECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT)OF.ORDERDATHD.29/06/2012PASSEDINITA|NO.183/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007, PRAYING THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE)PLEASED TO: iFORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OFLAW STATED THEREIN,LAW STATED THEREIN, Il.ALLOW THR APPBAL AND SBT ASIDE THE ORDERSPASSEDBY|‘THKINCOME.TAX|APPELLATETRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.183/BANG/2011DATED:29/06/2012 CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THEAPPELLATECOMMISSIONERCONFIRMINGTHE.ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(3), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OFJUSTICE AND EQUITY.PASSEDBY|‘THKINCOME.TAX|APPELLATETRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.183/BANG/2011DATED:29/06/2012 CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THEAPPELLATECOMMISSIONERCONFIRMINGTHE.ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(3), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OFJUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS.DAY,N.KUMAR J.,DELIVBRED THR FOLLOWING: JU DBiGMENT Thisappeal1SpreferredbytheRevenue, challenging the order passed by the Tribunal, holdingthat the assessee has fulfilled all the conditions for|erant of exemption under Section 54F of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’) and thus,allowing the exemption. 2. The assessee purchased a land measuring19.06 acres with 4 squares built up residential house.It is assessed to tax by the Bangalore Zilla Parishad andthe description of the tax in their records is as ‘housetax’. The Bangalore Electrical Supply Co. Ltd.,(BESCOM) has provided service connection to theassessee on 15.05.2009. The assessment extracts of|the property shows that the property consists of a houseand not a vacant land. The entire property is in aresidential zone. — 3. In view of the aforesaid facts, the Tribunal held|that the assessee has purchased the residential houseso as to claim exemption under Section 54F of the Act.However, both the assessing authority as well as theappellate authority proceeded on the assumption thatthe assessee should prove that the residential housewhich was purchased is fit for habitation. According tothem, the house was too small to exist on half acre ofland and therefore, they declined to grant exemption. —The tribunal has rightly held that the assessee hasfulfilled the conditions under Section 54F of the Act. — We do not see any justification to interfere in theimpugned judgment. The consideration of substantialquestions of law does not arise and therefore, the appealis dismissed. 4. Sri Parthasarathy, learned Counsel for therespondents seeks four weeks time to file vakalath andthe same is accorded. Sd/-.JUDGE| ?>K Sd/-.JUDGE|