URMILA SINGH,BHOPAL vs. ITO,2(3), BHOPAL
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which upheld the assessment order. The assessment order was passed ex-parte by the AO, adding a significant amount as capital gain without considering deductions. The assessee argued that the entire sale value was treated as capital gain, ignoring cost of acquisition.
Held
The Tribunal found that both the AO and CIT(A) passed orders ex-parte without proper opportunities to the assessee. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the orders passed by the AO and CIT(A) were ex-parte and if the assessee was denied natural justice. Whether the capital gain computation was erroneous.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 144, 48, 45(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 03.06.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 13.03.2024 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2019-20, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Page 1 of 3
Urmila Singh ITA No. 562/Ind/2024 - AY 2019-20
On hearing learned Representatives of both sides, it emerges that the
CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee and thereby upheld
the order of AO for the reason that the assessee did not make any
submission before him despite opportunities given. It is further observed
that the AO has also passed ex-parte assessment-order u/s 144 after
making an addition of Rs. 78,84,000/- on account of capital gain from sale
of a property. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the capital gain assessed
by AO is against the provision of section 48/45(1) in as much as the AO has
taken entire sale value of property as capital gain without giving deduction
of costs, etc. Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee is ready to file
necessary details before AO and in the interest of justice and also for
computation of correct taxable income in accordance with provisions of Act,
this case ought to be restored at the level of AO for a fresh adjudication.
Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a
request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do not
seek unnecessary adjournments.
Considering above submissions and also having regard to the
principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to remand this
matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh after giving necessary
opportunities to assessee. The assessee is also directed to ensure
participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek
Page 2 of 3
Urmila Singh ITA No. 562/Ind/2024 - AY 2019-20
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.
Order pronounced by putting on notice board as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 27/01/2025
Sd/- Sd/-
(DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Indore
िदनांक/Dated : 27/01/2025
Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order S SRer .Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 3 of 3
