PRADIP DUTTA ,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 29(1), KOLKATA

The assessee has challenged the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the assessment order, wherein the addition of ₹2,87,44,375/- was made by the ld. AO by adding the entire sale consideration which even did not belong to him and relate to other co-owners.

Similarly, before the le CIT (A), the assessee did not respond to various notices issued and the case was dismissed in limine by the ld. CIT (A) by not condoning the delay of 115 days in filing the appeal.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) is late by 115 days, which were explained by the assessee to be on account of genuine and bonafide reasons and accordingly, we are inclined to condone the same. We note that the ld. AO as well as the ld. CIT (A) has decided the issue ex-parte. The assessee during the course of hearing has furnished before us the copy of conveyance deed evidencing the fact that the assessee’s share in the said property was only 1/14th and therefore, even the addition made by the ld. AO treating the entire sale consideration as short-term capita

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