BHULAKSHMI PATURI,CHEVURU vs. ITO, WARD 1,, GUDIVADA

ITA 229/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 July 2026AY 2018-197 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to provide a speaking order and did not deal with the specific grounds raised by the assessee. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) confirmed additions despite the assessee furnishing evidence that the land sold was agricultural.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenges an ex-parte assessment order confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee claims no notices were served, violating natural justice, and that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and failed to consider evidence of agricultural land sale.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order and violated principles of natural justice by not affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Whether the land sold was agricultural land and thus not a capital asset for capital gains tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 2(14)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 02/01/2026, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, “AO”) under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), dated 27/03/2024

ITA 229/VIZ

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 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →