Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT
This is an appeal by the legal heir of the deceased Assessee against the order dt. 15/03/2019 of Ld. CIT(A)-3, Ludhiana.
Following grounds have been raised in this appeal:
That the CIT(A) has erred in passing impugned order as the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity of being heard citing the sudden demise of one of his family member.
2. That the CIT(A) erred in passing the order dated 15/03/2019 in appeal of the appellant without fully discussing the contentions and therefore, order is bad in law as it has been passed with a prejudiced mind. 3. That the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer erred in holding that asset involved was agriculture land and doesn’t qualify as Capital Asset under section 2(14) of the Act. 4. That the appellant crave leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal
at any time before the hearing of the appeal.
3. The main grievance, in this appeal relates to the reasonable opportunity of being heard not given by the Ld. CIT(A).
Facts of the case in brief are that the A.O. on the basis of information that the assessee sold land measuring 13 Kanal 07 Marla to M/s Green Planet Coloniser Private Ltd. Kalkaji, New Delhi for a consideration of Rs. 91,66,667/- on 26/06/2007 and the assessee was having 5/54th share in the above said land, initiated the proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’). The A.O. also issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act alongwith questionnaire. As there was no response from the assessee side, the A.O. framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and assessed the income at Rs. 8,31,929/- which was worked out by him as Long Term Capital Gain belonging to the assessee.
Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who sustained the addition made by the A.O. by passing the ex-parte order and by observing that the authorized representative of the assessee filed assessees death certificate on 21/12/2018 and thereafter did not file any written submission in support of his contention that the land was agricultural land.
Now the legal heir of the deceased assessee is in appeal.
Ld. Counsel for the legal heir of the deceased assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the exparte order without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. It was further stated that the assessee could not represent his case due to sudden demise of one of his family members.
In his rival submissions the Ld. DR supported the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).
I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case it is an admitted fact that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order exparte and the explanation given by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee for not appearing before the Ld. CIT(A) was that there was a sudden demise of one of the family member. I therefore, considering the peculiar facts of this case set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.