Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arises from an ex-parte order. The assessee claims that notices were not received due to personal tragedy and reliance on a former consultant's email. The sale of agricultural land was reinvested in a house property, and the assessee believed no capital gains tax was applicable.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee's inability to represent their case before the lower authorities was due to reasonable cause arising from personal circumstances and incorrect communication of notices. Therefore, the case should be verified denovo by the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment order was justified, and whether there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the lower authorities due to personal reasons and communication errors.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 143(3), 54F, 144, 144B, 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA
Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present appeal filed by the assessee arises out of order dated 30/12/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for assessment year 2013-14 on following grounds of appeal :
A.Y. 2013-14 Balu Mahadu Sande “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in determining the taxable income of the Appellant for the Assessment Year 2013-14 at Rs 1,49,88,536.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in treating the entire consideration from sale of agricultural land amounting to Rs 1,44,00,000 as the income of the Appellant, when the Appellant was only a co-owner of the property 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not granting deduction under Section 54F of the Act, when the consideration received on sale of the agricultural land was re- invested in purchase of a house property.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in treating the entire consideration from sale of agricultural land amounting to Rs 1,44,00,000 as the income of the Appellant, without considering that the Appellant was only a co-owner of the land.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in treating an amount of Rs 5,88,536 as income from salary.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in reopening the assessment for AY 2013-14 vide issuance of a notice dated 13.02.2020 u/s 148 of the Act.
The Appellant craves leave to, add to or alter, by deletion, substitution, or otherwise, any or all of the foregoing grounds of appeal
at or before the hearing, and to submit such statements, documents, and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing.”
2. The Ld.AR at the outset submitted that, the orders passed by assessing officer as well as NFAC/CIT(A) are ex-parte orders. He placed reliance on the affidavit filed by the assessee that states as under :
The Ld.AR also filed additional evidences under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Act Rules in order to substantiate its claim relating to the nature of land in dispute being agricultural. The paper book of additional evidence filed by the assessee also contains details of transfer of alleged agricultural land and reinvestment of the proceeds out of sale of the land.
A.Y. 2013-14 Balu Mahadu Sande 3.1 He submitted that, as the notices were issued to the Email Id of earthswhile CA, assessee could not represent its case before Ld. CIT(A) /NFAC. In the interest of justice the Ld.AR prayed for the issue to be remanded to the appropriate authority to consider the claim in accordance with law. 3.2 On the contrary, the Ld.DR placed reliance on the orders passed the parties below.
We have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the light of record placed before us.
4. From the averments made by the assessee in the affidavit reproduce here in above, we do not find any malafide intention on his behalf for not able to represent the case before the authorities below. 4.1 Considering the emotional circumstances that engulfed assessee due to loss of his daughter and circumstances due to which the notice did not receive assessee from the NFAC/CIT(A), we are of the opinion that, reasonable cause has been made for not able to represent its case before the Ld.AO & Ld.NFAC/CIT(A). The revenue has nothing to say contrary to the above. 4.2 Based on the sufficient cause made out by the assessee, we are of the opinion that, the issue should be verified denovo by the Ld.AO. Assessee is directed to furnish all relevant document in support of its claim before the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO shall verify the evidences filed by the assessee in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee.
A.Y. 2013-14 Balu Mahadu Sande 5. Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/05/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai: Dated: 16/05/2025 Poonam Mirashi, Stenographer Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T.