VANRAJSINH D. VAGHELA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ायपीठ SMC, अहमदाबाद ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
ी संजय गग, ाियक सद एवं
अ पूण गु!ा, लेखा सद के सम%।
]
]
Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member
आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.733/Ahd/2025
िनधारण वष /Assessment Year : 2012-13
Vanrajsinh D. Vaghela
1, Kum Kum Park Society
Nr.Somnath Society
Highway Road
Sanand
Ahmedabad – 382 110
(Gujarat)
बनाम/
v/s.
The ITO
Ward-3(2)(1)
Ahmedabad – 380 015
थायी लेखा सं./PAN: ABRPV 5389 B
(अपीलाथ(/ Appellant)
()* यथ(/ Respondent)
Assessee by :
Shri Parin S. Shah, AR
Revenue by :
Smt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, Sr.DR
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 15/10/2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 16/10/2025
आदेश/O R D E R
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless
Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated
25/02/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-2013. Vanrajsinh D. Vaghela vs. ITO
Asst. Year : 2012-13
The assessee is aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities in making/confirming the addition of Rs.26,24,684/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.50C of the Act on account of difference in the sale value of the property as mentioned in the sale-deed as compared to the stamp duty value/Collector rate in respect of property sold by the assessee.
The Ld. AR for the assessee, at the outset, has brought our attention to the impugned orders of both the lower authorities to submit that the same are ex-parte orders. The Ld.AR has submitted that the assessee is a villager and was not aware the nitty-gritties of the income-tax proceedings. He has further submitted that this was the first year of the e-proceedings. He has further submitted that the assessee was not served physically by the AO. He, therefore, submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO as the assessee disputes the stamp duty value and wants the matter to be referred to the Valuation Officer of the Department.
The Ld.DR, on the other hand, relied upon the findings of the lower authorities.
Considering the rival submissions, in our view, interests of justice will be well-served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the AO. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of AO for assessment afresh on this issue. The AO will duly consider the application of the assessee, if any, moved for obtaining the Valuation Report of the Departmental Valuation Officer to ascertain the value of the property during the relevant period. Asst. Year : 2012-13
With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16 /10/2025. (Annapurna Gupta ) Accountant Member अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 16/10/2025
टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
आदेश की "ितिलिप अ#ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ$ / The Appellant 2. "%थ$ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु& / Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु& ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध , अिधकरण
अपीलीय
आयकर
,
अहमदाबाद/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad.
6. गाड फाईल /
Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
स%ािपत "ित ////
सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.