SHRI YASIN KHAN,CHURU vs. ITO,WARD-1, CHURU

आदेश / O R D E R

Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): - 1. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of certain additions in an assessment framed u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act on 21/02/2016. The learned first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of condonation of delay of 715 days.

2 ITA No.74/Jodh/2019 Sh. Yasin Khan Assessment Year: 2010-11 2.1 The relevant facts are that during assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee sold certain immoveable property Khasra No. 814 & 1642/806 during the year. It was also noted that the sold piece of land was situated within municipal limits of Churu City and therefore, it was a capital assets and gains arising there- from would be chargeable to tax under the head capital gains. The value as shown in the registry was Rs.2 Lacs but it was valued at Rs.39.44 Lacs by DIG, stamps. 2.2 The assessee submitted that it had no source of income and the land was not situated in notified area. Hence, no return of income was filed in response to reassessment notice which led Ld. AO to invoke the provisions of Sec.144 and frame the assessment on the basis of information on record. The matter of valuation of the land was referred to valuation officer who valued the land at Rs.63.83 Lacs. Adopting the same, capital gains were computed at Rs.63.20 Lacs. As stated earlier, the assessee’s appeal before Ld. first appellate authority got dismissed for want of condonation of delay. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. We have carefully heard the arguments advanced by both the representatives. Our adjudication to the appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. 4. The material on record would show that the appeal was filed before Ld. CIT(A) manually in Form No.35 on 09/04/2016 which was apparently within prescribed time. However, the appeal, as par extant rules, was required to be filed electronically. The same has subsequently been e-filed on 07/03/2018. Counting from this date,

3 ITA No.74/Jodh/2019 Sh. Yasin Khan Assessment Year: 2010-11 the appeal is time barred by 715 days. We find that that assessee was diligent in filing the appeal, though manually and there was no lapse, in this regard. The appeal filing fees was also deposited by that date. Therefore, merely because the appeal was not e-filed as per newly amended provisions, the same could not be a ground to deny the assessee to contest the issue on merits. The appeal has already been e-filed. Therefore, keeping in assessee’s background as well as the facts of the case, we direct Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits by way of speaking order. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate his stand failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with adjudication as per material on record. 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) �ाियक सद� / Judicial Member लेखा सद� / Accountant Member

मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांकDated : 21/12/2020 Sr.PS:-Jaisy Varghese आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��थ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयु�/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, जोधपुर / DR, ITAT, Jodhpur 5. गाड�फाईल / Guard File 6.

ITA No.74/Jodh/2019 Sh. Yasin Khan Assessment Year: 2010-11 आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायकपंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, जोधपुर / ITAT, Jodhpur.