JANARDAN R PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI RAVJIBHAI ISHWARBHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, ANAND
THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President
And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member
Janardan R. Patel,
L/h of Late Sri Ravjibhai
Ishwarbhai Patel, 1671,
Mukhi Niwas, Bakrol
Road, Opp. Vaibhav
Cimena, VV Nagar,
Anand-388001
PAN: BIXPP1977P
(Appellant)
Vs
The ITO,
Ward-4
Anand
(Respondent)
Assessee by: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.R.
Revenue by: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R.
Date of hearing
: 30-09-2025
Date of pronouncement
: 17-11-2025
आदेश/ORDER
Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 03-01-
2024
passed by CIT(A)/ADDl/JCIT(A)-12,
Delhi for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
“1. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in dismissing appeal of the appellant in the name of dead person due to non prosecution even though appellant had already expired on 02-08-2019 and appeal being filed by the legal heirs to whom no notice(s) were issued.
Assessment Year 2012-13
I.T.A No. 812/Ahd/2025
Janardan R. Patel L/h of Late Shri Ravjibhai Ishwarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2012-13
2
The Ld. CIT(A)-NEFC erred on facts and in law in upholding order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 in the name of a dead person.
The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in upholding order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 without appreciating that return claimed to have been filed in the name of appellant after his death on 12-11-2019 was not a valid return.
The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs. 14,58,560/- on account of sale of agricultural land without appreciating that there was no actual sale of land but land was transferred through registration in the guise of sale deed as per of family settlement and therefore, no capital gain exigible on the said transaction.
The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs. 14,58,560/- on account of sale of agricultural land without appreciating that appellant received only Rs. 2,00,000/- together with two brothers as consideration towards family settlement.
The Ld. CIT(AO-NFAC erred on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs. 14,58,560/- on account of sale of agricultural land without granting deduction of indexed cost of acquisition without which computation of long term capital gain was impermissible as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B C Srinivassa Setty 128 ITR 294 (SC),
Total tax effect (see note below)
Rs. 2,49,324/-”
Additional Grounds of Appeal
“1. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in not quashing the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer without disclosing reasons for reopening and inviting appellant's objections thereon after filing of return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act.
Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in not quashing the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer despite the fact that memo of sanction u/s 151 accorded by the Ld. PCIT was not disclosed to the appellant.
Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in not quashing the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer despite the I.T.A No. 812/Ahd/2025
Janardan R. Patel L/h of Late Shri Ravjibhai Ishwarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2012-13
3
fact that Assessing Officer proceeded with inquiry u/s 142(1) by issuing questionnaire together with Notice u/s 148 dated 30-03-
2019 even though time period to furnish return u/s 148 had not expired before which such inquiry was not permissible.”
The assessee has filed his return of income u/s. 139 for assessment year 2012-13. On the basis of information, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has sold immoveable property aggregating to Rs. 43,75,680/- during financial year 2011-12 registered in the office of sub-