RAGHVENDRA PALIWAL,PIPARIA vs. ITO -2, ITARSI

ITA 282/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 October 2026AY 2018-1914 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance. However, the assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) submitted before the Tribunal that the assessee is illiterate and was unaware of the proceedings, and that the property sale was based on a revoked Power of Attorney. The AR requested a last opportunity to participate before the CIT(A). The Tribunal, considering that the CIT(A)'s order was passed based on the assessee's non-compliance and the AR's undertaking to be participative, decided to set aside the impugned order. The case was remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) with strict directions to the assessee to participate in the hearing and file all submissions and supporting documents. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a speaking and well-reasoned order on merits. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessing Officer (AO) had reopened the assessee's case under Section 147/148, treating the assessee as a non-filer. The AO assessed the total income at Rs. 85,54,500/- based on the sale of immovable properties, adding a difference of Rs. 25,54,500/- between the sale consideration and market value. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte, citing non-compliance and lack of interest from the assessee in pursuing the appeal, despite multiple notices. The assessee, aggrieved by the CIT(A)'s order, filed the present appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the AO erred in completing the assessment ex-parte, without providing a proper opportunity of hearing and considering the facts and merits, thus violating principles of natural justice, and if so, whether the assessment should be reassessed de novo? (Section 144, 144B, 147, 148) 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal ex-parte, without providing a proper opportunity of hearing and considering the facts and merits, thus violating principles of natural justice, and if so, whether the appeal should be adjudicated on merits? 3. Whether the reopening of assessment and the assessment completed under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is illegal, invalid, violative of principles of natural justice, and without jurisdiction? 4. Whether the AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 85,54,500/- representing sale consideration, and the CIT(A) erred in confirming it, by invoking Section 50C, ignoring that the sale transactions were executed through a Power of Attorney which was revoked prior to the sale deeds, making the transactions illegal and non-est, and that the assessee did not receive the sale consideration? 5. Whether the AO erred in invoking Section 50C for the alleged sale of immovable properties, given the revocation of the Power of Attorney and the illegality of the transactions? 6. Whether the sale deeds are non-est and void, making the sale transactions void and consequently no sale was affected, rendering the additions illegal? 7. Whether the AO erred in treating the stamp duty valuation as LTCG without giving the benefit of indexed cost of acquisition, and if the transaction is taxable, whether capital gains should be calculated as per the Act? 8. Whether the AO erred in invoking Section 50C without following the due process of law, including referring the property for valuation? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the CIT(A)'s order was bad in law, illegal, and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The assessee, being illiterate, was unaware of the proceedings and remained non-compliant before the CIT(A) due to the sale of property being executed through a revoked Power of Attorney. The assessee requested a last chance before the CIT(A). The assessee also raised grounds regarding the AO's ex-parte assessment, the illegality of reopening, the invalidity of sale deeds due to revoked Power of Attorney, non-receipt of consideration, and improper invocation of Section 50C without due process. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue's Senior Departmental Representative left the issue to be decided by the Tribunal based on law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 246A,Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI & SHRI ARVIND SONI

For Appellant: Ms. Darshna Bhiya, AR
Hearing: 07.10.2026Pronounced: 12.10.2026

Per Paresh M. Joshi, JM:

This is an Appeal filed by the Revenue under section 253 of the Income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act

for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/NFAC

/S/250/2024-25/1070572772 (1) dated 22.11.2024 passed

by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter

referred as the “Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment

Raghvendra Paliwal ITA No. 282/Ind/2025 AY-2018-2019 Year is 2018-2019 and the corresponding Previous Period is from 01/04/2017 to 31/03/2018. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX

2.

1 That as and by way of an Assessment Order made u/s 147

RWS 144B the Act, the to

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 →