Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore dated 06.07.2018. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the learned Income Tax Officer has erred in making additions of Rs. 1099249 to the total and taxable income under the head long term capital gain from sale of house property. 2 That the learned Income Tax Officer has erred in not allowing deduction of the indexed cost of Rs. 782497 for arriving at the Gain out of the house property sold for Rs. 26,66,667. 3 That the learned Income Tax Officer has erred in not allowing full deduction for investment in purchase of new house property out of the gain from sale of the old house property. Cost of purchase of new house property was claimed at Rs. 16,69,000 whereas the income tax Officer allowed deduction for Rs. 15,16,418 without stating any reason to reduce it.
2 SMC – Dayaldas Sachdev of 2019
4 That the learned Income Tax Officer has erred in overlooking the income of Rs. 2,15,170 from long term capital gain on sale of house property declared by the appellant in the return of total income while making additions to total income of Rs. 10,99,249. 5 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred in law in confirming the assessment order without granting opportunity of being heard to the appellant and even without going through the assessment record. 6 That the appellant pray your honour to set aside the additions of Rs. 10,99,249 made to the total and taxable income made by the Income Tax Officer
At the outset of the hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee contended that no proper and meaningful opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A). He submitted that on 02.05.2018, 22.05.2018 & 06.07.2018, he was informed that ld. CIT(A) would not be attending the office on these days. It was further submitted that the Counsel himself had gone to the office of the ld. CIT(A) and found that ld. CIT(A) was not available.
Therefore, it was prayed that ld. CIT(A) may be directed in this regard. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR did not object to the submission of the learned Counsel for the assessee.
I have heard both the parties and perused the orders of lower authorities. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that in the interest of justice, the assessee’s matter is liable to be reconsidered by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) should decide the appeal afresh in terms as indicated hereinabove after
3 SMC – Dayaldas Sachdev of 2019 affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law and the assessee is also directed to cooperate/appear before ld. CIT(A) in this regard.
In result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
Order was pronounced in the open court on 28.05.2020.