Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, did not file a return for AY 2013-14. The Assessing Officer reopened the case under Section 147 and made a best judgment assessment, adding Rs. 42,92,952/- on account of alleged capital gains and other deposits. The CIT(A) upheld the additions.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the additions were made based on the total sale consideration without allowing for costs, and the assessment order was ex-parte. Considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the additions made by the AO without allowing for costs and based on an ex-parte assessment were justified, and if the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 144, 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 22.08.2024 which is arising out the order u/s. 147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2013-14 framed by ITO, Ward- Kudal.
The sole ground of appeal raised in the instant appeal is against the addition of Rs.39,75,000/- on account of alleged capital gain on sale of agricultural land. The assessee has also raised an additional ground of appeal regarding addition of Rs.3,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act.
3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessment order is ex-parte framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and even the impugned order is also ex-parte. He, therefore, prayed that in the interest of justice one more opportunity may be provided and the matter may be restored to the file of Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for de-novo adjudication.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and supporting the order of the lower authorities but did not oppose to the request made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and did not file return of income for AY 2013-14. Based on the information available in AIMS Module of ITBA base certain transactions relating to the assessee were reported. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act issued after necessary approval and the case was reopened for assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. There were certain transactions of sale of immovable property valued at Rs.39,75,000/- and fixed deposits of Rs.3,00,000/-. In the absence of any explanation from the assessee’s side, the Ld. Assessing Officer proceeded to frame best judgment assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and made the addition of Rs.42,92,952/-. The assessee challenged the additions before the Ld. CIT(A) but again failed to succeed as there was no compliance to the notice of hearing.
We, however, considering the prayer made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and also observing the fact that one of the additions have been made by the Ld. Assessing Officer is total amount of sale consideration and no deduction for cost (if any incurred) has been allowed in the absence of specific details. Therefore, in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised on merits in the instant appeal to the file of the Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment for which reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be given to the assessee. The assessee is directed to update the correct and latest email id and contact detail on the Income Tax Portal for smooth proceedings. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 28th day of March, 2025.