Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee had opted to settle the appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. The Designated Authority had issued Form -1 under the scheme.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, and the Department had no objection. Therefore, the appeal was considered infructuous and treated as withdrawn.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is infructuous due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and whether the grounds of appeal regarding additions to long-term capital gains, procedural irregularities, and valuation reports are valid.
Sections Cited
Sec 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961, Sec 156, Sec 250, Sec 143(3)/147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “SMC”, JABALPUR
Sandhya Pandit v. Income Tax Officer Near Lilhare Clinic, Baihar Railway Station Rd, Itwari Road Balaghat, Balaghat H.O. Ganj, Chitragupt Nagar, Balaghat, Balaghat-481001. Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh-481001. TAN/PAN:ALNPP9235G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR) O R D E R (1). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 23.12.2023 order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (hereinafter referred as to “ACIT”)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertaining to the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order appealed against is contrary to facts, law and is void ab initio 2. in the facts and circumstances of the case Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the impugned order passed by Ld AO making addition on account of Long Term Capital Gain of Rs Rs.42,14,863/- which is lacking any reasonable ground, is unjustified and required to be deleted in full.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal and affirming the actions of the Assessing Officer, as Hon'able CIT(A) failed to duly consider the valuation taken or request the valuation report for the property in question and passed the order u/s 250 without seeking any clarification or valuation report regarding the value of the property acquired before the financial year 198182.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of Learned AO Page 2 of 4 while making addition of Long Term Capital Gain to the income of the appellant, @s under any circumstances the income of his Mother Late Smt. Meera Mishra shall not be added in the hands of the appellant and the order is to be declared as NULL and VOID.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) CIT(A) has erred in upholding the Impugned order passed by Ld AO where show cause notice was issued on 11/12/2019 and fixed hearing on 12/12/2019 and passed order under section 143(3)/147 immediately on 13/12/2019 which is an unreasonable length of time. it clearly case appears that Ld. AO was in hurry to complete his cases for no good reason and passed order without looking into the facts of the case already produced before Ld. AO which is bad and completely unacceptable in the eyes of Law.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) CIT(A) has committed an error endorsing the action of Learned AO, who has erred in adopting value U/s 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961 which is bad in law.
7. In facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] passed an order under section 250 without seeking any clarification or valuation report regarding the value of the property acquired before the financial year 1981-82.
8. In facts and circumstances of the case the order shall be declared as null and void as Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) CIT(A) has failed to issue Notice of demand u/s 156 to the appellant 9. In facts and circumstances of the case, it is asserted that the long term capital gain from the property sold rightfully belongs to the late mother mt. Meena Mishra but the addition of 1/4th of the long term capital gain actually taxable in the hands of Late mother was added to the income of the assessee is not just and completely unwarranted. 10. in facts and circumstances of the case, the Order u/s 250 Passed by CIT(A) appears to be highly casual and out of the 22 Page order only one page i.e. Para 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 is written in support of the Order Passed against the appellant which is bad in law and clearly shows lack of reasonable ground and admissible basis in law. 11.in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant grieves for bonafide belief from the authorities. 12. in the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) CIT(A) has erred in not giving the opportunity of being heard to appellant.
13. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)CIT(A) has failed to apply principal of natural Justice. 14.The assessee craves leave to add, urge, alter or withdraw any ground/grounds before or at the time of hearing of the appeal .”
Page 3 of 4 (2) At the time of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”, for short) for the assessee informed us that the assessee has opted to settle the aforementioned appeal under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (“DTVSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form -1 under DTVSVS, 2024. He also drew our attention to letter dated 20.08.2025 sent to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) in this regard. Copy of Form -1 issued by Designated Authority under DTVSVS was also enclosed with the aforesaid letter. Ld. Departmental Representative (“DR”, for short) for Revenue has no objection for withdrawal of the appeal. After due consideration and in view of the foregoing, we are of the opinion that this appeal has become infructuous on account of aforesaid DTVSVS, and this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid DTVSVS. Accordingly, this appeal having become infructuous, is treated as withdrawn and is hereby dismissed.
(2.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason the disputes under this appeal before us are not settled under the aforesaid DTVSVS, then the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of this appeal in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/08/2025.