SONAM CHOUDHARY,BIKANER vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), BIKANER

ITA 508/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 August 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the facts on record and the submission made by the assessee's counsel, found it appropriate in the interest of justice and fair play to accept the prayer. The matter was remitted back to the file of the AO for a de novo meritorious adjudication of the issues concerning the additions/disallowances made in the hands of the assessee. The AO was directed to pass a speaking order after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and making necessary submissions. The assessee was also directed to be diligent in attending hearings and avoid adjournments unless warranted. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sonam Choudhary, did not file an income tax return for Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 148 due to the alleged escapement of income from the sale of an immovable property for Rs. 11,70,000. The Sub-Registrar had valued the property at Rs. 13,36,137. The AO completed the assessment by treating Rs. 13,36,137 as short-term capital gain and Rs. 10,313 as income from other sources. The assessee appealed this order to the CIT(A), NFAC, which passed an order on 24.04.2025. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should grant the assessee an opportunity to present necessary compliances and documentary evidence to the AO for a de novo adjudication of the additions/disallowances made, considering the assessee's failure to file the original return. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and fair adjudication). Assessee's Contention: The assessee's counsel requested that the matter be remanded back to the AO, assuring that all necessary compliances and documentary evidence would be furnished for proper examination and verification of the claims regarding the additions/disallowances. Revenue's Contention: The Additional CIT-DR left the decision regarding the assessee's prayer to the discretion of the bench.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE

For Respondent: DR (Physical)
Pronounced: 13/08

PER BENCH:

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated

24.04.

2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. In this case, assessee did not file the return. An immovable property was sold for a consideration of Rs. 11,70,000/- which was valued by the Sub-Registrar at Rs. 13,36,137/-. Since return was not filed, case of the assessee was taken up by issuing notice u/s 148 alleging escapement of income from assessment in respect of this transaction of immovable property. Ld. AO concluded the assessment by treating short term capital gain at Rs. 13,36,137/- and income from other sources at Rs. 10,313/- Asst. Year: 20

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →