JAI PARKASH YADAV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-5, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7644/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 June 2022AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 9,83,055/- as Long Term Capital Gain. The assessee failed to appear, provide a complete address, or rebut the findings of the lower authorities.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessee's case under Section 147 as the assessee had not filed a return of income but had co-owned a property sale. The AO made an addition of Rs. 15,40,000/-. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, confirming an addition of Rs. 9,83,055/- as Long Term Capital Gain.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether the addition on account of Long Term Capital Gain was justified, given the assessee's non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR
Hearing: 24.05.2022Pronounced: 07.06.2022

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana dated 21.06.2019.

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming following action of the Assessing Officer in: i) initiating proceedings u/s 147/144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and completing assessment u/s 147/144 of the Act at an income of Rs. 15,40,000/-; ii) initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act without there being any reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; iii) passing order u/s 147/144 of the Act without supplying copy of reasons & without giving opportunity to file the objection; iv) confirming the addition of Rs.9,83,055/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain. 1 | P a g e

v) No section has been mentioned by Ld. AO, under which section addition had been made amounting to Rs. 15,40,000/- and Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.983055/- confirmed by Ld. CIT(A). The above actions being arbitrary, erroneous, unwarranted and unjust must be quashed with directions for relief.” 3. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is seen from the records that since 22.12.2020, no one has been attending the hearing on behalf of the assessee. The notices sent through speed post are returned unserved with remark “incomplete address”. It is seen from the records that the notices were sent by the Registry as per the address furnished by the assessee in Form No.36. The assessee has not provided the complete address which he ought to have supplied. The assessee has also not provided any current address, therefore, the appeal of the assessee is taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being disposed off on the basis of material available on record.

FACTS OF THE CASE

4.

Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that it was noticed by the AO that the assessee has not filed any return of income and it was also noticed that the assessee alongwith two other co-owners, had sold a property amounting to Rs.42,08,000/-. Therefore, the case of the assessee was re-opened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for re-assessment.

Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued but no compliance was made. Before the assessing authorities, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee.

Therefore, the AO made addition of Rs.15,40,000/-.

5.

Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal. Thereby, Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.9,83,055/- as Long term Capital Gain.

6.

Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

7.

Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has been thoroughly negligent and has not attending the proceedings before the AO and the Ld.CIT(A). After considering the material, it has been fair enough to restrict the addition to the extent of Rs.9,83,055/-.

8.

Apropos to grounds of appeal, the assessee has not rebutted the finding arrived at by the authorities below even before this Tribunal. The assessee has also not brought any contrary material on record therefore, in the absence of the finding of the authorities below, the addition is sustained. The grounds raised by the assessee are rejected.

9.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th June, 2022.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →