SHOBHA SINGH,SHAHDOL MADHYA PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAHDOL MADHYA PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 115/JAB/2023Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 November 2023AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the matter should be remanded to the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with an opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to comply with future notices from the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an ex-parte order from the CIT(A) which was passed due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee argued that notices were only sent via email, which may not comply with Section 282 of the Income Tax Act, and that they were not given a proper opportunity to present evidence regarding the agricultural nature of the land.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order violated principles of natural justice by not providing a proper opportunity of hearing, and if the land sale was correctly treated as long-term capital gain.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 282,Section 2(14)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH ‘DB’, JABALPUR

Before: Dr. B. R. R. KumarSh. Yogesh Kumar US

Hearing: 28.11.2023Pronounced: 29.11.2023

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of ld. NFAC/CIT(A), New Delhi dated 18.05.2023.

2.

The assesse has raised the following grounds of appeal are as under:-

1. That, the impugned order dated 18.05.2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), is in violation to the principal of natural justice and bad in law.

2. That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in not giving proper opportunity of hearing to the Appellant Assessee. The alleged notices, if any, sent by the Id. CIT(A) to the assessee are through only emails, which is not in complete compliance to sec.282 of the Income T ax Act, 1961.

3. That the Id.AO has also erred in not giving proper opportunity of hearing to the Assessee and to produce relevant evidences to show that land is situated in Rural Area and is agriculture land.

4. That, the learned assessee officer has err ed levying Long Term Capital Gain on the sale of agriculture land, which is not permissible in the eye of law.

Shobha Singh 5. That, the learned Assessee Officer has erred relying on the case law Smt. SarifabibiMohmed Ibrahim v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1993) 204 ITR 631 (SC), which is not applicable in the present case on facts and law.

6.

That, the order dated 18.05.2023 passed by the learned CIT(A) is without application of mind and simply reiterated the order passed by learned Assessee Officer.

7.

That, the impugned orders passed by the Department is contrary to sec. 2(14)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3.

It was brought to our notice that the order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A) ex-parte, owing to non-compliance to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR pleaded that given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

The ld. DR fairly accepted, hence in the interest of justice, we hold that no prejudice would be cause to Revenue, if the matter is remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass order a fresh. The assessee shall comply to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) from time to time without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/11/2023.

More judgments on Section 282

All 613 judgments and leading authorities on Section 282 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →