NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THROUGH LH SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA,JAIPUR vs ITO WARD 4(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
JAIPUR BENCHES,’’SMC” JAIPUR

Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihyla-@ITA No. 587/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2008-09

Shri Narayan Lal Khandaka
Thru: L/h Shri Shyam Bihari Khandaka
3150, Govind Bhawan, Jai Lal Munshi Ji Ka
Rasta, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur-302 001
Ward- 4(1)
Jaipur
LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No.: AXNPK 1135 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :ShriSaurav Harsh Advocate

Ms. Satwika Jha, Advocate jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing

: 06/08/2025
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: : 08 /09/2025

vkns'k@ORDER

PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 11-02-2025, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2008-09 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal.
‘’That the AO as well as ld.CIT(A) has grosslyerred in law as well as in facts while not allowing benefit of indexation of cost of acquisition of Rs.6,60,098/- as taken by the assessee in his return of income while calculating long term capital gain without reason and basis.’

2
NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THRU: L/H SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA VS ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR
2.1
It is pertinent to mention that the assessee has filed two applications under Rule 29 of Income (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 seeking leave to produce additional evidence at the stage of appeal. The narration as made by the assessee in his application is reproduced as under:-

23 JULY 2025
Thru: L/h Shri Shyam Bihari Khandaka

Ward 4(1) , Jaipur
APPLICATION UNDER RULE 29 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL)
RULES, 1963 SEEKING LEAVE TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE OF APPEAL
1. The Appellant above-named respectfully submits this application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, seeking leave of the Hon'ble Tribunal to produce additional evidence in the captioned appeal. The additional evidence comprises the following documents, copies of which are annexed hereto:
Copy of Receipt of House Tax, Copy of Survey Report of Ownership of immovable property situated at 3150, Jai Munshi Ji Ka Rasta, Amer Road, Jaipur issued by the Municipal Corporation of Jaipur.
2. That assessee appellant filed the instant appeal against the order passed by the Id.
Assessing officer made addition of Rs 8,82,000/- invoking section 50C of the Act vide order dated 25.03.2016. That Id. CIT(A) against the order passed by the Id. Assessing officer delete the addition of Rs 4,81,304 and adopted the actual sale consideration on which the assessee sold the immovable property i.e. Rs. 400691/- but refused to give the benefit of cost of acquisition in absence of purchase deed.
3. That it is humbly submitting that ancestors of the deceased assessee appellant was in the possession of the immovable property which was sold by the deceased assessee prior to the independence when there was rule of the King in the city and therefore the deceased assessee was not in possession of any documents which proofs the Purchase of the said Immovable property.
4. That subsequent to the independence there was a survey report conducted by the Municipal corporation which gives ownership right to ancestors of the deceased assessee appellant. That we are submitting the Copy of City Survey Report which was obtain by the deceased assessee on 03.10.2006

3
NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THRU: L/H SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA VS ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR
Reasons for Earlier Non-Submission
5. The Appellant humbly submits that the aforesaid documents could not be filed before the lower authority during the original proceedings due to an inadvertent oversight and practical difficulties, and not due to any mala fide intent.
Relevance to the Appeal and Interest of Justice
6. It is respectfully submitted that admitting these documents now is essential for a fair and complete adjudication of the appeal. These documents thus directly address evidence of the purchase or allotment of the immovable property.
7. In view of the above, the Appellant submits that the conditions for invoking Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules are fulfilled in the present case. The documents in question are necessary to enable the Tribunal to pass orders" on a fully informed basis and constitute evidence of critical Importance in other words, a substantial cause exists for their admission.
Additionally, to the extent that the lower authority's decision may have been rendered without the benefit of these

Dated: 05 Aug.2025
Thru: L/h Shri Shyam Bihari Khandaka

4
NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THRU: L/H SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA VS ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR
3. The Appellant humbly submits that the aforesaid documents could not be filed before the lower authority during the original proceedings due to an inadvertent oversight and practical difficulties, and not due to any mala fide intent.
Relevance to the Appeal and Interest of Justice
4. It is respectfully submitted that admitting these documents now is essential for a fair and complete adjudication of the appeal.
5. In view of the above, the Appellant submits that the conditions for invoking Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules are fulfilled in the present case. The documents in question are necessary to enable the Tribunal to pass orders" on a fully informed basis and constitute evidence of critical Importance in other words, a substantial cause exists for their admission.
Additionally, to the extent that the lower authority's decision may have been rendered without the benefit of these materials, the Appellant pleads that it be given sufficient opportunity at this appellate stage to bring them on record. No prejudice will be caused to the Respondent by the admission of this evidence; on the contrary, receiving these documents into the record will assist in arriving at the truth and serve the ends of justice.
The appellant humbly requests the Hon’ble Bench to exercise its discretion in favour of admitting the above documents, given their fundamental relevance to the issues in dispute. Such indulgence will not only advance the cause for justice but also ensure that the Tribunal has before it all vital facts necessary to render a proper, fair decision in this case.
The Bench has no objection to accept it as it has connection with the issue of appeal of the assessee. Hence, both the applications (supra) are admitted.
3.1
Apropos to the solitary ground of appeal of the assessee, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has taken the sale value of the property at Rs.4,00,696/- as per Section 50C of the Act in place of Rs.8.82,000/- as long term capital gain taken by the AO in his assessment order and thus he partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The narration so made by ld. CIT(A) in his order at para 6 to 6.1.1. is reproduced as under:-

5
NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THRU: L/H SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA VS ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR
6. Decision:I have considered the facts of the case, written submission and case laws relied upon by the appellant as against the observations and findings of the AO in the assessment order. The submissions and contentions of the appellant are discussed and decided as under:
6.1 Ground No.1: In this ground the appellant has challenged the addition worth
Rs.8,82,000/- treated as unexplained Long Term Capital Gain. The AO received the information regarding the sale of immovable property worth Rs. 8,82,000/- by the appellant from the office of sub

NARAYAN LAL KHANDAKA THROUGH LH SHYAM BIHARI KHANDAKA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR