K MOHAN REDDY,RANGAREDDY DISTRICT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 2179/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 June 2018AY 2008-093 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's procedure was improper and the assessment was completed ex-parte. Therefore, the assessment order was set aside and the proceedings were restored to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning capital gains on agricultural land. The appeal was initially problematic as the assessee lacked a PAN and the appeal fee was paid by a third party.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the assessment order due to procedural irregularities by the AO, including the lack of a PAN for the assessee and an ex-parte assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH & SHRI V. DURGA RAO

PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : This is an appeal by assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Hyderabad, dated 03-10-2017 on the issue of bringing to tax the capital gain on sale of agricultural land.

At the outset, it was noticed by the Registry that the assessee had filed the appeal paying the fee in third party

:- 2 -: S.A. No. 177/Hyd/2017

name. When enquired, it transpired that assessee did not have any PAN number and

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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →