RAJENDRA GANPAT JAGTAP,PUNE vs. ITO WARD(8)(1), PUNE, PUNE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER RAMA KANTA PANDA, V.P. :
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 18.10.2024 of the learned CIT(A)-National
Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi, for assessment year 2018-2019. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee is non- filer of ITR. However, it was seen that assessee has incurred high value financial transactions during F.Y. 2017-18, the details of which are as under :
2
ITA.No.2587/PUN./2024
Information
Amount (Rs)
TDS Statement – Sales consideration on sale of immovable property (Section 194IA)
2,95,00,000/-
TDS Statement – Commission or brokerage
(Section 194H0
1,01,698/-
TDS Statement – Rent (Section TDS-194I)
2,97,71,698/-
1. The Assessing Officer, therefore, reopened the assessment by recording reasons as per the provisions of sec.147 and notice u/sec.148 was issued to the assessee on 19.04.2022. The assessee, in response to the same, filed return of income on 02.03.2024 declaring total income at Rs.17,54,860/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/sec.147 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") vide order dated 28.03.2024 by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,98,88,836/- wherein he made addition of Rs.2,81,33,976/- on account of long term capital gains towards sale of an immovable property. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer has allowed the indexed cost of acquisition at Rs.27,200/- out of sale price of Rs.2,95,00,000/- but did not allow the expenses made towards improvement of land amounting to Rs.2,03,33,500/- treating the same as devoid of merit.
2. Since the assessee did not respond to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) in the ex-parte order passed by him upheld the action of the Assessing Officer.
3
ITA.No.2587/PUN./2024
Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Learned Counsel for the Assessee, at the outset, referring to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that only three opportunities were granted by the Ld. CIT(A) within a short span of 2 ½ months. Further the assessee was not well conversant with technology for which he could not see the notice nor could appoint any Counsel to represent his case. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one final opportunity to substantiate his case.
The Learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposed the arguments advanced by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee and submitted that three opportunities were granted by the Ld. CIT(A) for making compliance. However, the assessee never bothered to respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be upheld.
We have heard the rival arguments made by both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite three opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee neither made any submission nor sought any adjournment, for which, the Ld. CIT(A) was constrained to pass the ex-parte order. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Assessee that given an 4 ITA.No.2587/PUN./2024
opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A).
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submissions before the Ld. CIT(A) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly.
Grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 16.01.2025. [VINAY BHAMORE]
[RAMA KANTA PANDA]
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Pune, Dated 16th January, 2025
VBP/-
Copy to 1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. The CIT(A), Pune concerned.
4. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.
5. Guard File.
//By Order//
////
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches,
Pune.