SHRI NITIN SHAMJI SHAH,MADURAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD-2(5), MADURAI

The registry has noted a delay of 785 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the basis of condonation petition dated 21.07.2022. The Ld. AR has submitted that 2 - the appeal could not be filed due to lockdown situation arising out of Covid-19 Pandemic. After excluding the period of exclusion, the effective delay was for 56 days only. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the condonation of delay. However, accepting the pleadings of Ld. AR, I condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits.

The Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the property was jointly owned by the assessee along with her wife. The Ld. AR placed on record a copy of order passed by Tribunal in the case of assessee’s wife Smt. Nayna Nitin Shah in dated 08.11.2021 wherein the issue has been restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted that this appeal may also be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to enable to revenue to take consistent stand in the matter.

I find that the assessee admitted capital gain of Rs.3.39 Lacs for sale of certain property. The Ld. AO applied the provisions of Sec. 50C and rejected the claim of the assessee that the property was agricultural land. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the stand of Ld. AO. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before me.

With a view to enable the revenue to take consistent stand in the matter, I accept the argument of Ld. AR and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in line with the adjudication done in assessee’s wife case. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case.

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.