LATA PRALHAD DESHMUKH,NASHIK vs. CIT(A), PUNE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRAAssessment year : 2023-24
PER R.K. PANDA, VP:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated
31.07.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2022-23. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that this appeal was fixed for hearing a number of times but no one was appearing in the last 4 occasions starting from 19.12.2024 till
17.06.2025. It was further seen that due non-appearance of anyone on 17.06.2025
the case was adjourned to 09.09.2025. However, today also when the name of the assessee was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment of the case has been filed. Under these circumstances, we
2
deem it proper to decide this appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. DR.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee against the rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 13.07.2022 declaring total income of Rs.70,890/- and claiming refund of Rs.2,25,370/-. The assessee during the financial year 2021-22 relevant to assessment year 2022-23 had received an amount of Rs.2,22,26,400/- from the Nashik Municipal Corporation against compulsory acquisition of their land for road widening, the details of which are as under:
No.
Details of property
Amount of consideration (Rs.)
1
S.No. 201/C/2, Pimpalgaon Bahula,
Nashik
74,83,200/-
2
S.No.222/A,
Pimpalgaon
Bahula,
Nashik
1,47,43,200/-
2,22,26,400/-
The assessee claimed the said amount as exempt from tax. The CPC, Bengaluru in the intimation passed u/s 143(1) did not consider the exempt income of Rs.2,22,26,400/- and TDS thereon of Rs.2,22,264/-. The rectification application filed by the assessee was dismissed by the CPC. The assessee
3
thereafter filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC who dismissed the same by observing as under:
“4. Decision
The appellant has raised 4 grounds in appeal.
The ground no 1 to 4 pertain to only one issue that AO has not considered compensation of Rs.2,22,26,400/- as exempt income and nor considered
TDS deducted by Nasik Municipal Corporation of Rs.2,22,264/-.
1 I have gone through the facts of the case and have the following observations:
The appellant e-filed her return of income for A.Y 2022-23 on 13.07.2022
declaring total income at Rs.70,890/- and claimed refund of Rs.2,25,370. The return of income was processed by the CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act on 25.10.2022 accepting total income but issued a refund of Rs.1,270/-. The appellant filed rectification application to rectify the mistake. The rectification application was processed on 02.05.2023 by passing an order u/s 154 of the Act without making any correction in order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The appellant again filed rectification application u/s 154 on 23.06.2023 and the same was processed on 23.06.2023 by passing order u/s 154 without any correction.
The appellant has filed this appeal against the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 23.06 2023
2 In appeal proceedings, appellant has submitted that during the F.Y. 2021- 22, appellant had received consideration from Nasik Municipal Corporation against compulsory acquisition of land for road widening. The details of the property for which compensation was received is as under:
Sr. No.
Details of property
Amount of consideration
(Rs.)
1
S.No. 201/C/2, Pimpalgaon Bahula,
Nashik
74,83,200/-
2
S.No.222/A, Pimpalgaon Bahula,
Nashik
1,47,43,200/-
2,22,26,400/-
The appellant has submitted that the above compensation is exempt under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR). The appellant has submitted that we have claimed the compensation of Rs.2,22,26,400/- as exempt income and TDS deducted by Nashik Municipal Corporation of 4
Rs.2,22,264/- was claimed as refund. The Income Tax Department has passed intimation order under section 143(1) wherein it has considered total income of Rs.70,890/- and issued refund of Rs.1,270/- with considering the exempt income of Rs.2,22,26,400/- and TDS thereon of Rs.2,22,264/-.
The appellant has furnished copy of Circular No. 36/2016 of CBDT and mentioned that "the RECTLARR Act” which came into effect from 1st
January 2014 in section 96 inter alia provides that Income Tax shall not be levied on any award or agreement made under the RECTLARR Act.
3 I have carefully considered the rival submissions and material made available on record. On perusal of written reply it is noticed that appellant's contention is prima facie correct that compensation received on land acquisition as mentioned above in exempt from Income Tax. However it is also noticed form record that appellant was provided sufficient opportunities to furnish documentary evidences in support of ground of appeal. In appellate proceedings, appellant has furnished copy of order passed u/s 143(1), copy of rectification order u/s 154 and copy of Circular No. 36/2015. The appellant has failed to furnish copy of ITR filed for A.Y. 2022-23 to establish that receipt of Rs.2,22,26,400/- was claimed as exempt income, copy of Form No. 26AS reflecting availability of TDS credit for the year under consideration, copy of documents showing compulsory acquisition of land by Nasik Municipal Corporation during the year. As such, mere filing written submission cannot be considered sufficient enough in support of grounds of appeal. So, I am constrained to uphold the rectification order passed u/s 154 by the AO CPC for want of documentary evidences as well as on merit too. In the circumstances, the grounds of appeal of the appellant are dismissed.
The grounds No. 1 to 4 is dismissed.
Result:-
In the result, the appeal is dismissed.”
Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that despite number of opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee did not make any submission for which he was constrained to uphold the 5 rectification order passed by the Assessing Officer / CPC u/s 154 of the Act for want of documentary evidence. Even before us also nothing has been filed so as to take a contrary view than the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on this issue. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court at the conclusion of hearing itself i.e. on 9th September, 2025. (ASTHA CHANDRA)
VICE PRESIDENT
पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 9th September, 2025
GCVSR
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:
अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent
4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
////
Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे
/ ITAT, Pune
6
S.No.
Details
Date
Initials
Designation
1
Draft dictated on 09.09.2025
Sr. PS/PS
2
Draft placed before author
09.09.2025
Sr. PS/PS
3
Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member
JM/AM
4
Draft discussed/approved by Second
Member
AM/AM
5
Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS
Sr. PS/PS
6
Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS
7
Date of uploading of Order
Sr. PS/PS
8
File sent to Bench Clerk
Sr. PS/PS
9
Date on which the file goes to the Head
Clerk
10
Date on which file goes to the A.R.
11
Date of Dispatch of order