Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) pertaining to an assessment order for AY 2013-14 under Section 147 read with Section 144. The initiation of proceedings was based on the sale consideration declared for an immovable property being substantially lower than the circle rate.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the issue to the NFAC. The assessee was granted one final opportunity to submit their claim, and directed to cooperate with the NFAC proceedings. The grounds raised were allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment order under Section 147 was valid and whether the NFAC correctly dismissed the appeal for non-compliance, necessitating a final opportunity for the assessee.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 148, 50C, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “A”:NEW DELHI
Date of hearing 21.07.2025 Date of 25.07.2025 pronouncement ORDER PERSUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The assessee preferred the captioned appeal, challenging the order dated 13.09.2024passed by theNational Faceless Appeal Centre (herein after referred {NFAC}pertaining to assessment order dated
The assessee has raised the flowing grounds in appeal:
1. 1. That the assessment order passed u/s 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act was bad in law.
2. Initiation of proceedings u/s 148 was completely on erroneous facts, without application of mind, so the same should be decided as void ab initio.
3. That the failure to invoke the provisions of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act for determining the accurate market value of the property was a serious procedural lapse, rendering the assessment order flawed and unjustifiable.
4. That the appellant had already filed reports from Registered Valuer under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, but due to a filing error, these documents were mistakenly submitted in the penalty order appeal rather than in the quantum appeal. Despite being filed, the CIT(A) did not consider these reports in the penalty appeal, which further prejudiced the appellant's case.
5. That the first appellate authority also failed to appreciate the documentary evidence as filed before the same. Thus, the impugned order has no merit as provided under Section 250 of the Act.
A.Y. 2013-14 Rajesh Vs. ITO 3 6. If necessary, additional/ revised /modified grounds of appeal shall be filed at the time of hearing of the instant Appeal.
3. The assessee has filed the application for condonation of delay for 37 days. In the application the assessee has stated that due to illness he has not filed the appeal within prescribed time limit. The assessee has shown sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within time limit. Therefore, we allow the application for condonation of delay. Delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication.
4. The assessee is a resident individual engaged in agricultural activities and also a handicapped person. The assessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee under the provision of Section 147 and Section 144 of the Income Tax, Act 1961 on the basis that the assessee had allegedly sold an immovable property for Rs.35,00,000 during the relevant financial year. The initiation of proceedings was grounded solely on the premises that the sale consideration declared by the assessee was substantially lower than the circle rate of Rs.82,61,000/- applicable to the property in question. It is pertinent to note that the determination of the fair market value of the property, as per circle rate, was utilized by AO. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee is in appeal before CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under:
5.2 The assessee was provided multiple opportunities by this office to submit documents and make submissions in response to the appeal filed. However, the assessee has not exercised this option despite multiple reminder. The table below indicates the dates and the compliances status of the various notices issued.
The Ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by Ld. NFAC the assessee did not file his submissions before the authority, for which the appeal was dismissed in non-compliance by the NFAC.
Since in the instant case the Ld. NFAC has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantive its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the proceedings before Ld. NFAC. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25/07/2025.