← Back to search

INDRAJEET SURESH MAGAR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR

PDF
ITA 755/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 October 20255 pages

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” Ɋायपीठ पुणे मŐ ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE

BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT
AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.755/PUN/2025
िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2018-19

Indrajeet Suresh Magar,
100, Saroj Niwas, Ruikar
Colony, Kolhapur- 416003. PAN : AIAPM7745G

Vs.

ITO, Ward-2(1),
Kolhapur.
अपीलाथŎ / Appellant

ŮȑथŎ / Respondent

Assessee by :
Shri Farrukh Mohammad
Munir Mulla
Department by :
Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Date of hearing :
30-09-2025
Date of Pronouncement :
29-10-2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated
26.07.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi
[“CIT(A)”] pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2018-19. 2. There is delay of 172 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing both the sides, we condone the delay of 172 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. Incorrect Assessment Year: The sale of the property on 12.04.2018 should be taxable in AY 2019-20, but it has been incorrectly assessed in AY 2018- 19 by the Assessing Officer. 2. Proportional Taxation: The assessee's ownership is only 50%, and hence the capital gain should be taxed proportionately. The Assessing Officer has failed to account for this.

2
ITA No.755/PUN/2025, AY 2018-19

3.

Indexed Costs: The indexed cost of acquisition and improvement should be allowed as deductions. The Assessing Officer has not correctly calculated these indexed costs The purchase price of the property purchased on 10.06.2011 is Rs. 36,05,500/-. The indexed cost of purchase should be allowed as a deduction. The purchase price should include stamp duty & registration paid Rs. 1,94,600/-. The indexed cost of purchase should be allowed as a deduction. The purchase price should include service tax, VAT & other charges paid for purchase deduction. Rs. 1,11,875/-. The indexed cost of purchase should be allowed as a deduction. The cost of improvement of the property in FY 2012-13 is Rs. 10, 06,823/-. The indexed cost of improvement should be allowed as a deduction. Total Deduction Particulars Cost of Acquisition/ Improvement Year Index Indexed Cost of Acquisition/Improve ment F.Y. 2019-20 Cost of Flat 36,05,500/- 2011-12 184 54,86,630/- Stamp Duty Registration 1,94,600/- 2011-12 184 2,96,130/- Service Tax and VAT and Other 1,11,875/- 2011-12 184 1,70,246/- Cost of Improvement 10,06,823/- 2012-13 200 14,09,554/- Total 73,62,560/-

4.

Incorrect Tax Calculation: The tax on long-term capital gain should be calculated as capital gain – ((maximum amount not chargeable to tax i.e. 2,50,000 – interest income)) * 20%. The Assessing Officer has used an incorrect formula. 5. TDS and Advance Tax Credit: TDS on property and interest, as well as advance tax paid, should be given credit in the correct assessment year, i.e. AY 2019-20. TDS on property of rs.74,000/- reported by the buyer in AY 2018-19 should be given credit in the year the properly is taxed, i.e. AY 2019-20.”

4.

Briefly stated the facts as culled put from the statement of facts filed along with Form 36 are that the assessee is a Non-Resident Indian (“NRI”) and presently residing along with his family and parents in Australia. He visits India very rarely and since pandemic he has last visited India in the month of July 2023. For AY 208-19, the assessee did not file his return of income. Based on the information flagged by the Department under the category of NMS regarding the sale of immovable property by the assessee, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO") issued a show cause notice u/s 148A(b) on 19/03/2022 seeking clarification as to why Return of Income has not been filed by the assessee, in response to which the assessee had given a submission stating that he resides in Australia and has not filed the return of income as his income from India was below the taxable limit. Also, he had no documentary evidences available with him at that point of time as the same

3
ITA No.755/PUN/2025, AY 2018-19

were in India and no one had access to these documents except the assessee himself. The assessee had later on communicated the same and had submitted the documents against the notices issued for recovery and penalty as soon as he came to India. As the assessee failed to comply with the statutory notice(s) and show cause notice(s) issued from time to time, the Ld.
AO proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) vide his order dated 21.03.2023 thereby making an addition of Rs.74,00,000/- on account of sale of immovable property on the basis of the SFT filed by the Sub

INDRAJEET SURESH MAGAR,KOLHAPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR | BharatTax