Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony
This is assessee’s appeal for the A.Y 2014-15 against the order of the CIT (A)-1, Hyderabad, dated 25.01.2019.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee individual filed his return of income for the relevant A.Y 2014-15 on 26.3.2015 declaring total income of Rs.8,96,800/- and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the notices u/s 143(2) and 143(1) were issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, the AO noticed that the assessee had sold a property, but no evidence was filed in support of the claim of the said transaction. Therefore, he added the entire consideration of Rs.1,05,00,000/- to the returned income of the assessee and brought it to tax. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) stating that it is a purchase of the property and not sale of the property. However, the CIT (A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal as none appeared for the assessee before him. The assessee is in second appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal:
“1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erroneous both on facts and in law.
2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deciding the appeal without providing opportunity to the appellant.
3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have served the notice on the appellant.
4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the amount of Rs.1 ,05,00,000/- represents the purchase consideration paid by the appellant; 5. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that the said amount of Rs.1,05,00,000j- was not the sale consideration received against the sale of the property but investment made against purchase of the property and that, therefore, such an addition cannot be made by the Assessing Officer.
Any other ground or grounds that may be u~ at the time of hearing”.
The learned Counsel for the assessee has drawn our attention to Form No.26AS which is filed as additional evidence in the paper book filed by the assessee to demonstrate that the transaction was purchase of property and not sale of property. Taking the same into consideration, we are inclined to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee and remand the issue to the file of the AO to consider the same de novo and if it is found to be purchase of the property, then to complete the assessment de novo in accordance with law. Page 2 of 3
In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.