SHRI JEETENDRA RAMCHAND SAMTANI,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-4, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1163/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 December 2023AY 2010-114 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back for a fresh determination. The assessee was granted an opportunity to present their case and lead fresh evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident, sold a flat and claimed exemption under section 54. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim and made an addition on account of short-term capital gain. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the disallowance of exemption under section 54 was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Kudwa
For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP:

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 04-12-2019 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-13, Pune in respect of the assessment order notified u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

Tersely, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a Non- resident who filed e-return declaring total income at Rs.14,23,430/-.

During the year under consideration, the assessee along with his wife (co-owner), sold a flat by the name of Panchsheel Heights for a total consideration of Rs.32,77,500/- and claimed exemption u/s.54. The AO disallowed the said claim and made addition on account of short term capital gain thereby determining total income at Rs.37,75,230/-.

The ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal by means of an ex parte order. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has approached the Tribunal.

3.

I have heard both the sides and gone through relevant material on record. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee could not be represented before the ld. CIT(A) because the registered mail ID was of the Chartered Accountant, who could not attend the proceedings because of illness in the family. He also submitted that the appeal in the case of his wife, Ms.Nita Ramchand Samtani, other co-owner of the same property, came up for hearing before the Tribunal in in which the matter has been remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for a fresh determination. A copy of the order dt. 23-03-2023 has been placed on record. In view of the facts obtaining in the instant case and considering the request made on behalf of the assessee, I am of the opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the matter afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence in support of his case.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04th December, 2023.

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →