PRATHEUSH ANTONY LANGBEIN,MULAVANA HOUSE, THURUTHY P.O, VAZHAPPALLY WEST vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTL.TXN, TVM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the appellant had opted for DRC, but the application was not admitted as the variation exceeded the threshold limit. The AO passed the final assessment order in line with the draft order, and no illegality or perversity was found in the assessment order.
What were the facts?
The appellant, an NRI, sold immovable property for Rs. 40,00,000. No regular return was filed. The AO formed an opinion of income escapement and issued a notice u/s 148. The appellant filed a return declaring nil income, but the AO passed a draft assessment order, assessing long-term capital gain. The appellant's application to the Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) was not admitted due to the variation exceeding the threshold limit.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order passed by the AO is illegal or perverse, considering the non-admission of the appellant's application before the DRC.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144C(13),Section 143(1),Section 148,Section 144C(1),Section 245MA
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the final assessment order dated 27.01.2025passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.
Brief facts of the case are that appellant is an individual and Non-Resident Indian (NRI). No regular return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') was filed by the appellant. Based on the information that appellant sold immovable property during the previous year relevant to the A.Y. 2018-19 for a Pratheush Antony Langbein consideration of Rs. 40,00,000/-. The DCIT, Circle International Taxation, TVM (for short, 'AO') formed an opinion that income escapement assessment to tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 was issued to the appellant on 07/04/2022. In response to the notice u/s. 148, appellant filed return of income on 18/11/2023 declaring nil income. Against the said return of income, draft assessment order u/s. 144C(1) of the Act was passed by the AO assessing long term capital gain at Rs. 22,60,916/-. On receipt of the draft order, the appellant had filed an application in Form No. 34BC before the DRC u/s. 245MA of the Act. The said committee not admitted the application on the ground that impugned order cannot be termed as ‘specified order’ as the aggregate sum of variation is more than the threshold limit of Rs. 10 lakh. Therefore, AO passed the final assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 27/01/2025 assessing total income at Rs. 22,60,916/-.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
At the outset, I find that on receipt of assessment order, the appellant had opted for DRC u/s. 245MA. However, DRC had not admitted the said application as the aggregate sum of variation proposed in the draft assessment order exceeded threshold limit of Rs. 10 lakh. The AO, on receipt of the order u/s. 245MA, passed Pratheush Antony Langbein final assessmentorder incorporating the addition proposed in the draft assessment order. Since the AO had passed the assessment order inline with the draft assessment order, which attained finality, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the assessment order. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed.
In the result, appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th August, 2025.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
