MAHABIR GURU,BARPALI PARA, BALANGIR vs. ADDL JCIT(A), COIMBATORE

None represented on behalf of represented on behalf of the assessee. Shri the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. represented on behalf of the revenue.

I have considered the submission of ld Sr. DR. A perusal of the order I have considered the submission of ld Sr. DR. A perusal of the order I have considered the submission of ld Sr. DR. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT (A) shows that the (A) shows that the assessee was asked to produce the sale was asked to produce the sale deed of the agricultural land, bank statement of IDBI, Sonepur Branch and deed of the agricultural land, bank statement of IDBI, Sonepur Branch and deed of the agricultural land, bank statement of IDBI, Sonepur Branch and P a g e 1 | 3 confirmation letter from buyer of the land. As per para 5.3 of the order of the ld CIT(A), it is noticed that the ld CIT(A) has taken into consideration the fact that the Assessing Officer has got confirmation from the purchasers of the land showing an amount of Rs.14,63,113/-, whereas the assessee has claimed Rs.42,00,000/- as exempt income from sale of agricultural land. Admittedly, no evidence in regard to the claim of Rs.42,00,000/- was produced before the Assessing officer. A perusal of the assessment order also shows that show cause notices were issued to the assessee but the assessee has not given any reply. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.