RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-11(1), NEW DELHI

1 ITA no. 880/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 880/DEL/2024 [Assessment Year: 2017-18

Ramesh Kumar Gupta, Vs Income Tax Officer, C-1/5, Gulal Chand Gupta Marg, Ward-11(1), New Delhi. Model Town-3, New Delhi. PAN: AACPG 8427 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Pratap Kumar Gupta, CA Respondent by Shri Akhilesh Yadav, Sr. DR Date of hearing 10.09.2024 Date of pronouncement 12.09.2021

O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC),

Delhi, dated 19.02.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee

has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That Id CIT(A) NFAC without appreciating the correct facts of the case is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal by way of ex-parte order for want of prosecution by the appellant assessee for which he was not empowered to do so in view of provision of section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and more particularly

2 ITA no. 880/Del/2024 under the circumstances when last notice for opportunity of being heard was provided more than 16 months back and thus order so passed by Id CIT(A) needs to be set aside. 2. That Id CIT(A) NFAC without appreciating the correct facts of the case and without giving proper opportunity of being heard is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in not deciding all the grounds of appeal taken by the appellant assessee which was independent to each other. 3. Without prejudice to ground of appeal no. 1 and 2. Even otherwise the Id CIT (A) NFAC without appreciating the correct facts of the case and without giving proper opportunity of being heard and ignoring the problem faced in e-assessment proceedings being first year of e-assessment in respect of knowledge/service of notices issued on e-portal without communication to the assessee by ways of SMS etc as in present days is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the validity of assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act without complying with the provision of said section and thus orders so passed deserves to be quashed. 4. Without prejudice to ground of appeal no. 1 to 3, the Id CIT(A) NFAC without appreciating the correct facts of the case and without giving proper opportunity of being heard is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the action of Id assessing officer in taking the cost of acquisition of property sold at Rs. Nil against the cost of inflation index of Rs. 6882161/- declared by assessee, without bringing any contrary evidence on record and without appreciating the fact that cost of acquisition of property sold cannot be Nil under any circumstances. 5. That Id CIT (A) NFAC, without appreciating the correct facts of the case and without giving proper opportunity of being heard is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case and by ignoring the provision of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, in confirming the value of property sold taken at Rs. 18000000/- as per stamp valuation authority against the actual sale consideration/fair market value of property of Rs, 10000000/- received and declared by the assessee and accordingly making the addition of Rs. 14882161/- in the income of the assessee under the head income from capital gain.

3 ITA no. 880/Del/2024 6. That Id CIT (A) NFAC, without appreciating the correct facts of the case and without giving proper opportunity of being heard is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the assessment order passed by Id assessing officer against the principal of natural justice and passed without following the provision of section 143(3)/144 as valid. 2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that in this case the assessee filed

his return of income through electronic mode on 31.07.2017 declaring total income

of Rs. 55,10,400/- under normal provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961,

hereinafter referred to as the “Act”. The case of the assessee was taken up for

limited scrutiny for examination of the issue of capital gain/ loss on sale of

immovable property. In response to statutory notices issued u/s 143(2) and 142(1)

of the Act there was no response on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, the

Assessing Officer proceeded to frame best judgment assessment u/s 144 of the Act

in the absence of the assessee vide order dated 22.11.2019. Thereby the Assessing

Officer made addition on account of long term capital gain of Rs. 1,48,82,161/-.

Thus, the AO assessed the total income at Rs. 2,03,92,561/- against the disclosed

income of Rs. 55,10,400/-. Aggrieved against this assessee carried the matter to the

learned CIT(Appeals). Before him also there was no representation on behalf of the

assessee. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte to the

assessee. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

hearing was not received by the assessee. He submitted that in the interest of

4 ITA no. 880/Del/2024 substantial justice opportunity may be given and the matter may be restored to the

file of AO.

the assessee was thoroughly negligent. He did not participate in the proceedings.

Even after filing the appeal there was no representation on behalf of the assessee.

Therefore, no lenient view should be adopted.

find that lower authorities have given sufficient opportunity by issuing the

statutory notices to the assessee. There was no response on behalf of the assessee.

Therefore, the authorities below were left with no option but to proceed ex parte to

the assessee. It is contended by the learned counsel for the assessee that notices

were not received by the assessee. It is also contended by the assessee that there is

a huge gap between the last notice issued by the learned First Appellate Authority

and the impugned order. He submitted that looking to the facts of present case the

assessee was not provided meaningful opportunity of being heard. Considering the

submissions and the reasons for non-appearance before the lower authorities, we

deem it proper, in order to sub-serve the interests of natural justice, that an

opportunity be given to the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order

and restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Authority to frame it afresh.

5 ITA no. 880/Del/2024 The assessee is directed to cooperate in the assessment proceedings and furnish requisite information as and when called for by the Assessing Officer. The assessee is further directed that he would not seek any adjournment without any reasonable

cause necessitated by any medical emergency. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 12th September, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI