KALPANA SUNIL BHAGAT,DOMBIVLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1), KALYAN

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Kalpana Sunil Bhagat, Vs. Income Tax Officer A-5, 1st Floor, Sevadham Ward 3(1), Building, Rajaji Path, Rani Mansion, Murbad Ramnagar, Dombivli East, Road, Kalyan, Thane, Maharashtra- 421301 Maharashtra- 421201 PAN/GIR No. APTPB2361M (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri Rashmikant Modi, CA & Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke, CA Revenue by Ms. Bhoomika Patel Date of Hearing 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 07.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 16.01.2026 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), by the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19. The following grounds raised by assessee are reproduced below:- i.

Centre, Delhi erred in disposing of the impugned order passed u/s 250 dated 16.01.2026 appeal without adjudicating the issues on merits in the absence of submissions from the Appellant. The Appellant submits that a fair opportunity to the Appellant be granted to present the case on merits in the interest of substantial justice. ii. Centre, Delhi erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 32,03,680/- made by the Learned Assessing Officer treating the same as Short Term Capital Gain without appreciating that the said amount represents the Appellant's share in sale proceeds of agricultural land and is not chargeable to tax under the head "Capital Gains.The Appellant submits that the addition of Rs. 32,03,680/- made as Short Term Capital Gain be deleted. iii. Centre, Delhi erred in not appreciating that the land sold by the Appellant is agricultural land situated in Village Narhen, Taluka Ambarnath, District Thane, which does not fall within the definition of "capital asset" u/s 2(14) of the Act. The Appellant submits that the land sold by the Appellant is agricultural land and a capital asset by virtue of the provisions of section 2(14). iv. Centre, Delhi erred in sustaining the action of the Learned Assessing Officer of initiating reassessment proceedings by issuing Notice u/s 148 on 08.04.2022 without appreciating that the alleged income escaping assessment is less than Rs. 50 lakhs for the year under consideration and that the time limit for issuing Notice u/s 148 was already expired on

31.03.2022. The Appellant submits that the Notice issued u/s 148 after the expiry of limitation period invalid and therefore, the assessment order passed be quashed. v. Оn the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellant submits that the Hon'ble National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in inflating the information erroneously by multiplying the reporting of the transaction value in case of the Appellant of Rs. 48,06,000/- towards her share in agricultural land into the transaction amounting to Rs. 2,40,30,000/- in respect of property transaction in respect of the agricultural land sold by the Appellant leading to the escaped amount exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Appellant submits that the reassessment proceedings, being based on incorrect facts, are liable to be quashed. 2. At the very outset, we noticed that the assessee was set ex parte before Ld. CIT(A) and considering the documents placed on record, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as assessee could not put effective representation. Therefore, in view of the said fact, the Bench is of the view that the matter be restored back to the files of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication

deposited by the assessee in PM’s Relief Fund and the receipt of the same be filed before ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 4. Before parting, we make it clear that the decision to restore the matter to the files of Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 07.07.2026 (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 07/07/2026 Z.U., PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Assessee प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. 5 आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत ////

उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst.