AADESH TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4151/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 February 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the matter required remission back to the file of the Learned CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The reasoning was that in order to avoid a miscarriage of justice, it was necessary to grant the assessee an opportunity to be heard and to present supportive evidence. The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had conceded to the lack of appropriate documentation before the lower authorities. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Learned CIT(A) to grant the assessee an opportunity of being heard and to consider the evidence already on record or any new evidence that the assessee might file. The Tribunal also clarified that if the assessee failed to cooperate with the Learned CIT(A), the latter would be at liberty to proceed with the matter and finalize it in accordance with the law. The specific issue of whether the transaction constituted a gift or a sale, and the consequent tax liability, was left to be adjudicated afresh by the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Syed Faraz Shere, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which arose from an order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-3(5), Noida, under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2011-12. The dispute concerns an addition of income of Rs. 60,25,395/- and a demand of additional tax of Rs. 34,07,325/-. The assessee contended that a portion of ancestral agricultural land, valued at Rs. 86,07,707/-, was gifted by his mother to his siblings through a registered Gift Deed on 11/05/2010. The assessee acted as a Power of Attorney holder for his mother for executing the deed. He was incorrectly asked to pay capital gains tax on this gifted property, as he did not sell any property. He claimed to have since obtained the relevant gift deed papers.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of income of Rs. 60,25,395/- and the resultant demand of additional tax of Rs. 34,07,325/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the First Appellate Authority are justified, considering the assessee's claim that the property transaction involved a gift from his mother and not a sale by him? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on Section 147 and Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that he was wrongly assessed for capital gains tax as he only executed a gift deed on behalf of his mother, who gifted the property to his siblings. He stated that he did not sell any property and therefore no income or tax arose from the transaction. He claimed to have the necessary gift deed papers to prove his case. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, through the Learned DR, submitted that the assessee failed to file appropriate documentary evidence such as bank accounts, sale deeds, and purchase deeds in respect of the immovable property transaction during the relevant year. This failure led to the addition made by the Assessing Officer and its confirmation by the First Appellate Authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMANAND

Hearing: 04.12.2025Pronounced: 04.12.2025

The instant appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 02.05.2025 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075997820(1) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 26.11.2018 passed by the ITO, Ward-3(5),Noida, under Section 147 r.w.s.

Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:

“During FY 2010-2011, a portion of our ancestral property, about 0.2810 Hectare of Agriculture Land, situated at Mohammadpur, on Faizabad Road, Uttar Pradesh, owned by my mother Mrs. Jahanara Shere, which had a market value of Rs. 86,07,707/-, was gifted to my brothers and a sister (real sons and a daughter of my mother) through registered Gift Deed, on 11/05/2010. Due to old age and poor health condition of my mother, she gave me the Power of Attorney, to sign & execute the relevant property gift deeds, on her behalf, in the office of Registrar of Properties, Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh. But due to some oversight I was being asked to pay capital gain on this gifted property, when I never gifted any property to anyone in FY 10-11 of Rs. 86,07,707/-. Since, I could not furnish the relevant Gift deed/ property gift papers before the Learned Assessing Officer ITO, Ward 3(5) Noida, and later-on before CIT (Appeals) Noida, I could not prove to them that NO property of Rs. 86,07,707/ was sold by me during FY 10-11, and therefore there does not arise any case of escaping any Income and resultant Income Tax on the same. But I am now in possession of relevant gift deed papers, of gifting of agriculture land worth Rs. 86,07,707/- which was infact gifted by my mother, to my brothers and sisters, and I only executed that gift deed, holding POA on behalf of my mother. In light of the fact that the enclosed Gift deed copy, prove it beyond any doubt, that the agricultural land of Rs. 86,07,707/- was actually gifted by my mother, and not me. I, therefore, request for COMPLETE REVERSAL of the Order Passed by the CIT (Appeal) Noida, u/s 147 read with Section 144, for AY 2011-2012, for Addition of Income of Rs. 60,25,395/- and request for complete waiver of additional Tax demanded of Rs. 34,07,325/-, vide demand notice u/s 156, imposed on me. Excerpts of Property Gift Deed are attached with this Reply dated 11/05/2010

3.

Learned DR at the outset submitted that the assessee did not file appropriate documentary evidences such as bank accounts, sale-deed and purchase-deed in respect of the transaction in question in regard to the immovable property during the year and therefore, the addition made by the Learned Assessing Officer was further confirmed by the Learned First Appellate Authority.

4.

In fact the Learned AR conceded to such facts pointed out by the Learned DR. He, therefore, prayed for setting aside the issue to the file of the Learned First Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication of the matter by granting an opportunity of being heard to represent his case effectively by adducing supportive evidences before him in respect of the case made out.

5.

Having heard the Learned representatives of the respective parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the matter we are of the considered opinion that in order to avoid miscarriage of justice the matter requires to be remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration of the issue by granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. We also make it clear that in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A), the said authority would be at liberty to proceed with the matter and finalize the same strictly in accordance with law. We order accordingly.

7.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 04.12.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →