VIDYOTMA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2 (1), SITAMARHI
Facts
The assessee entered into a land development agreement in FY 2014-15, transferring ownership of land for constructed property. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment, considering the capital gains arising from this agreement as escaped income. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed, upholding the AO's order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to a reasonable cause, finding that the assessee was residing in Sitamarhi while notices were served at a Patna address. The Tribunal also noted that the AO had not allowed the indexed cost of acquisition for capital gains, which is contrary to law. Hence, the matter was remanded.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without giving proper opportunity and whether the AO correctly assessed the capital gains without allowing indexed cost of acquisition.
Sections Cited
250, 253, 144, 147, 271(1)(c), 53A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA ‘DB’ BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2015-16 dated 28.05.2025. 1. 1. The Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 20 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons as under: “We enclose herewith an appeal u/s 253 of the I.T. Act 1961 against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 2015-16 on the 28-05-2025. Through this appeal should have been filed on or before 27/07/2025. That I, due to illness irregular to open the e-mail and not showing I.T. Portal. As and when I saw my portal thereafter, I am filing my appeal. ITA No.: 378/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vidyotma. Under the abovementioned facts and circumstances your goodself is requested to condone the said delay and to hear the appeal on merits. What are stated above are true to best of my information and belief. We therefore pray that delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and it should be treated as filed within the allowed time.”
2 After perusing the petition, we are satisfied that the assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) For that the Grounds of Appeal hereto are without prejudice to one mother. 2) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case ld. CIT(A) is not justified in not giving proper time to substantiate its claim which is violative of principal of natural justice. 3) For that the learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.89,31,552/- under the head long term capital gain. 4) For that the entire assessment order is bad both in law and facts of the case, 5) For that the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is arbitrary, unjustified, void, ab-initio and bad in laws”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessment was reopened on the basis of information available from the office of the
