NIZAMUDDIN ABDUL AZIZ KHAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO-23(2)(4), MUMBAI

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2015-16 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-33/Rg.23/55/2017-18 dated 27/12/2018. Although the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, Ld. AR drew our attention to ground No.2, to submit that Ld. CIT(A) refused to admit

Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident individual was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) on 27/12/2017. The assessee received an amount of Rs.4 Crores on sale of certain land and claimed the same to be exempt from tax, being sale proceeds from agricultural land. However, upon examination of documentary evidences including municipal records, Ld.AO reached a conclusion that the said land was falling within the definition of capital asset and hence, chargeable to tax. Accordingly, Long-Term Capital Gains of Rs.4 Crores was brought to tax.

Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee while pleading for acceptance of claim, made an alternative submission that it purchased a new property for Rs.3 Crores out of sale proceeds and therefore, it was entitled for deduction u/s 54F. However, as pointed out by Ld. DR, the assessee did not bother to file application justifying admission of fresh claim as per Rule 46A. The assessee failed to respond to the notices, issued in this regard. Accordingly, the addition evidences and fresh claim was rejected.

Upon due consideration of factual matrix as enumerated in preceding paragraphs, it transpires that despite being provided with sufficient opportunity, the assessee remained negligent in pursuing its additional claim and neglected the same in a very casual manner. However, before us, the assessee has taken same alternative plea of admission of fresh claim and additional evidences. Keeping in view the conduct of the assessee, the bench formed an opinion that in the interest of the justice, the fresh claim was to be admitted, however, upon payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-. Accordingly, the assessee is directed to deposit the same within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order to Legal Aid Authority, Mumbai. Upon payments as aforesaid, the appeal would stand remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for admission of fresh claim / additional evidences with respect to assessee’s alterative claim u/s 54F. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to admit and re-adjudicate the same after examination / verification of documentary evidences with a direction to the assessee to substantiate the same. The proof of payment shall be furnished to Ld. first appellate authority. Needless to add that failure to pay the cost as aforesaid would result into automatic dismissal of the appeal.

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15th January, 2020. (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) "ाियक सद" / Judicial Member लेखा सद" / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 15/01/2020 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese