Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance, and the current appeal before the tribunal was filed after a delay of 239 days. The assessee is an individual who entered into a development agreement for ancestral land, and the AO initiated reassessment proceedings. The assessee sold their share of the property in subsequent assessment years, leading to the capital gains computation.
Held
The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding reasonable cause due to the assessee being a senior citizen and not conversant with the online system. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing.
Sections Cited
133(6), 147, 148, 53A, 2(47)(v), 45, 48, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA ‘SMC’ BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ)
Assessment Year : 2015-16 Jai Prakash Singh, Near Shiv Vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Patna Mandir, Khajpura, Patna- 800014, Bihar PAN/GIR No. AINPS 1974 Q (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kumar Singhal, JCIT Date of Hearing : 28/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30/09/2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi dated 21.08.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Patna -1/11368/2019-20 passed for Assessment Year 2015-16.
The appeal is time barred by 239 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition stating that the assessee being a senior citizen and was not conversant with the computer system. The notices were issued to the assessee by the ld CIT(A) in the income tax portal and since the assessee was not aware of the notices, no submissions as well as paper book was filed.
P a g e 1 | 4 Only after getting the penalty notice from the department, assessee came to know about the dismissal of the appeal before the ld CIT(A). Immediately, he contacted the tax professional and filed the appeal. It was in this backdrop that there was delay in filing of appeal. It is prayed that the delay of 239 days may kindly be condoned. Ld Sr DR opposed the condonation petition.
After considering the condonation petition, I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause in not filing the appeal within the prescribed time and, hence, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual and a regular income tax assessee. The Assessing Officer got information under section 133(6) of the Act that the assessee is having piece of ancestral land of 13503.6 sq.ft in the name of six persons and all are family members. The assessee jointly made a development agreement with Jammano Shree Estate Private Limited for construction of the building. Accordingly, to the development agreement, the assessee is having 45 percent share out of total constructed area. The assessee sold his share of flat in A.Y. 2017-18 and 2018-19. Therefore, the AO initiated proceedings for reassessment u/s.147 of the Act and notice u/s.148 was issued to the assessee. In response to notice, the assessee filed return of income. The Assessing Officer opined that since the assessee had relinquished ownership right over his share by entering into development agreement, as such, the provision of section 53A of T.P. Act attracted the capital gain arising out of such transfer as per the P a g e 2 | 4 provision of section 2(47) (v) 45 and 48 of he Act. Accordingly, the AO computed the capital gain of Rs.13,50,589/- and created demand accordingly. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal but without any success, as the appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance. Hence, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard ld Sr DR and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO. In the ground of appeal, the assessee stated that the Assessing Officer erred in computing capital gain in the assessment year 2015-17 as the assessee neither transferred nor relinquish the right and title in the land nor has received sell consideration, therefore, no capital has arisen and the addition is bad in law. It is also evident that the assessment order has been passed u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee remained non-compliant and failed to produce any evidence in support of the claim. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(A) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the CIT(A) failing which the ld CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass
P a g e 3 | 4 appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/09/2025.