BHAGWAN EKNATH KADAM,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1749/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 July 2026AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The case was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee with an opportunity to present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee sold land for Rs. 48,00,000/- and claimed indexation on the cost of acquisition without providing supporting evidence. The Assessing Officer made additions under Section 50C, and the CIT(A) confirmed these additions ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming additions ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee, and if the assessee should be given a chance to substantiate their claims with evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 50C,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 263,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

Hearing: 02.07.2026Pronounced: 13.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE BENCH “SMC” BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1749/PUN/2026 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) BHAGWAN EKNATH KADAM INCOME TAX OFFICER KHARPUDI ROAD SARGAM JALNA-431203, MAHARASHTRA DHABA RAMNAGAR JALNA-431203, Vs. MAHARASHTRA PAN: EDSPK8110C

(Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms.Smruti Subnis.AR For Revenue : Shri. Manish Mehta, JCIT.Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 02.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13.07.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi passed u/sec 143(3) r.w.s 263 and u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee is senior citizen and there is a delay in filing the appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal and the delay was not intentional and filed an affidavit of the assessee for condonation of delay. On consideration of facts and information mentioned in the affidavit, there is a reasonable cause explained and the Ld. DR. has no specific objections. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that, the Assessing Officer(A.O) has received information that the assessee along with the relatives are holding the land and sold the property for Rs. 48,00,000/-. Out of the aggregate sale consideration, the assessee has sold the land share holding for a consideration of Rs. 28,00,000/- and the assessee has not filed the return of income for A.Y.2011-12. The A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and the assessment was completed u/sec 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide dated 27.12.2017 determining a total income of Rs. 5,23,650/-. Subsequently, the Pr.CIT on verification of the record and information found that the order passed u/sec 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and set aside the order and issued directions to the assessing officer vide revision order u/sec263 of the Act dated 17.03.2021. In compliance to the directions of the Pr.CIT, the AO has issued notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act and called for the details and clarifications. The A.O on perusal of the Statement of Long Term Capital Gains found that the assessee had taken cost of acquisition of Rs.3,18,500/- as on 01.04.1981 and claimed indexation. However, there are no purchase deeds/ evidences/valuer report in support of the claim of cost of acquisition and hence denied the claim of deduction. Further, the AO observed that in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing on applicability of provisions under section 50C of the act and there was no compliance. Finally the A.O considering the information available on record invoked the provisions of section 144 of the Act and made addition of differential value of Rs.22,69,678/- under section 50C of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.

30,93,643/- and passed the order 143(3) of the Income Tax Act dated 29.03.2022. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered grounds of appeal, statements of facts, finding of the AO and has issued notice of hearing and since there was no compliance, therefore the CIT(A) considering the information available on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings and the Ld.AR mentioned that non-compliance of notices before the CIT(A) is not a wanton act but circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with material evidences and prayed for an opportunity before the Lower authorities. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of CIT(A). 6. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and notices were issued. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismiss the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the Assessing Officer. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notices referred at Para 4 of the order but there was no response. Whereas the assesse has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non-appearance/ non-compliance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances, submissions and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13th July, 2026.

Sd/- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Pune, Dated: 13th July, 2026 Abhishek Mohan Abhishek Digitally signed by Abhishek Mohan Mohan Date: 2026.07.14 10:32:05 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अिीिार्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गार्डफ़ाइि / Guard File. 5. //True Copy// आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण,/ ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 50C

All 3,223 judgments and leading authorities on Section 50C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →