Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 05.03.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 06.12.2019 passed by learned ITO-5(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2012-13, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Ld. AR for assessee withdraws the adjournment application filed and prays that the case may be heard. Ld. DR does not have any objection.
Hence, the adjournment application is allowed to be withdrawn and hearing of case is proceeded.
The orders of lower-authorities were perused and deliberated. It emerged during hearing that the orders of AO as well as CIT(A) are ex-parte.
The AO initiated proceeding u/s 147 for AY 2012-13 on the basis of information available in Annual Information Return revealing that the assessee sold an immovable property situated at Gram – Bardari, Tehsil – Dhar, Indore for Rs. 76,14,000/-. During proceedings, the AO issued notices u/s 148 followed by notices u/s 142(1) but finding no or vague response from assessee, the AO noted non-compliant attitude of assessee and made ex-parte assessments u/s 144. The AO assessed entire sale consideration of Rs. 76,14,000/- as taxable capital gain. Before CIT(A) also, the assessee has remained non-compliant. During discussions, Ld. AR for assessee admitted assessee’s lapse in representation at the lower level but, however, submitted that the assessee has collected all relevant details/documents of the transaction to enable a proper representation before AO. He prayed that in the interest of justice, an opportunity may be given to assessee by restoring this matter back to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication.
Ld. DR for revenue submitted that he would have no objection against remanding these cases to AO but the bench must give stricter direction to assessee.
We have considered submissions of both sides and carefully perused the orders of lower-authorities. We have already noted the precise facts in earlier paras. On perusal of assessment-order, we also find that the AO has taxed entire sale consideration of property as capital gain without giving deduction of cost of acquisition, which is not in accordance with the provisions of section 48 of the Act. Therefore, the AO’s order is not sustainable. After a careful consideration of facts; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of AO, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk and responsibility of assessee and subject to the condition that the assessee shall pay a cost of Rs. 2,000/- to ‘Prime Minister National Relief Fund’ and submit receipt to AO. Needless to mention that the AO shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.