MALLANGOUDA ,GULBARGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, YADGIR

Present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 10.5.2024 vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064813301(1) Passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).

There is a delay of 117 days in filing the present appeal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee drawing the attention of the bench towards the condonation application as well as medical record of the uncle of the assessee, contended that the uncle of the assessee was suffering from cancer and ultimately expired it has also been mentioned that there was no one in his family to look after his uncle.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the AO has made the addition on the basis of the fact that the assessee has received a consideration of Rs.91,75,000/- towards the sale of one property of HUF, and has not declared any income from this transaction while filing the return of income. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that since there was a dispute among the vendor and vendee vis-à-vis non-receipt of full consideration the assessee has filed a civil suit for cancelling the sale deed. It has been pointed out that when the assessment proceedings were going on, the alleged sale transaction was pending in dispute before the Civil Court and the ld. Civil court vide order dated 9.12.2023 has cancelled the sale transactions and hence there is absolutely no gain to the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that since the civil court’s order has come later on, the AO was not having the benefit of that order. It is also pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) has granted only one opportunity to the assessee and thereafter decided the appeal of the assessee without dealing with the contentions of the assessee. At last ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that one more opportunity before the AO may kindly be granted.