SHRI SUBHASH MAHAVEER DURGANNAVAR,BELAGAVI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, BELAGAVI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 62/PAN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 June 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the assessee's submissions and confirmed the Assessing Officer's order with general observations. Therefore, the case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee admitted income during a survey but filed a return declaring it as long-term capital gain. The Assessing Officer treated it as business income and assessed it at the admitted amount. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the assessee's submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's submissions before dismissing the appeal. Whether the income should be treated as business income or long-term capital gain.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, ‘DB’ PANAJI

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Mr. Veeranna Murgod
For Respondent: Ms. Rijula Uniyal
Hearing: 15.05.2026Pronounced: 02.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, ‘DB’ PANAJI (Through virtual) BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.62/PAN/2026 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Subhash Mahaveer Vs. Income Tax Officer, Durgannavar, Ward-1(4), Vikrampur, Rayarmath Road, Belagavi, Margao, Athani, Dist. Belagavi 591304 PAN : ASRPD6011B Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : Mr. Veeranna Murgod (Through Virtual) Revenue by : Ms. Rijula Uniyal (through virtual) Date of hearing : 15.05.2026 Date of pronouncement : 02.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 28.11.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 18.12.2018 passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not considered the submissions of the assessee and has dismissed the appeal, therefore, an opportunity may be granted to go before ld.CIT(A) to which ld. DR has no objection.

3.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an

ITA No.62/PAN/2026 Subhash Mahaveer Durgannavar

individual and e-return for A.Y. 2016-17 filed on 30.03.2018 declaring income of Rs.2,00,12,159/-. Survey conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 16.09.2016 during which the assessee has admitted income of Rs.2,60,16,667/- for A.Y. 2016-17. However, assessee did not file the regular return of income. Thereafter, notice u/s.142(1) of the Act issued and in response the assessee furnished the return on 30.03.2018 declaring income from long term capital gain. Ld. Assessing Officer carried out the assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act and concluded that the nature of assessee’s income is business income and not long term capital gain and further assessed the income at Rs.2,60,16,667/- as was declared by the assessee during the source of survey. We further note that assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) claiming to have made detailed submissions in response to the notices dated 10.02.2021, 09.12.2022 and 14.03.2024. Ld.CIT(A) has observed that assessee responded to the notices and submitted written submissions, however, while adjudicating the issue the submissions filed by the assessee seems to have not been considered and with general observations has confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.

4.

Considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and there being no objection by ld. DR and without dwelling upon the merits of the case, we in the interest of justice deem it appropriate to remit back the issues to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the

ITA No.62/PAN/2026 Subhash Mahaveer Durgannavar

documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is directed to update email and contact details on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 02nd day of June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 02nd June, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.06.02 10:56:14 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, Panaji 4. ‘DB’ Bench / DR, ITAT, Panaji ‘DB’ Bench ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, Panaji/ ITAT, Panaji

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →