GOVARDHAN SINGH,ALIGARH vs. ITO 4(1)(3) ALIGARH, ALIGARH
Facts
The assessee failed to file a return of income for AY 2018-19. The case was reopened under section 148 as the assessee sold immovable property for Rs. 89,20,000/-. The assessee later filed a return declaring income as long-term capital gain, but failed to submit transaction details, purchase/sale deeds, or computation of capital gains.
Held
The Assessing Officer treated the entire sale consideration as short-term capital gain. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the assessment order, noting the assessee's failure to provide supporting evidence for the capital gain calculation and the nature of the property. The Tribunal noted the assessee's grievance regarding the denial of indexation benefit.
Key Issues
Whether the entire sale consideration of immovable property can be treated as short-term capital gain without considering the assessee's claim for indexation and without providing an opportunity to submit relevant documents.
Sections Cited
250, 148, 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 57/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19
Goverdhan Singh, Mahua Vs. Income-tax Officer, Kheda, Devi Nagla, Quarsi Koil, Ward 4(1)(3), Aligarh. Aligarh (UP). PAN : FFYPS0811D (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Advocate Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 19.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.08.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 03.12.2024 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10292493 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts state that the assessee did not file return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. Case was reopened by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the ground that the assessee sold immovable property for a consideration
ITA No.57/Agr/2025
of Rs.89,20,000/- to M/s. Sangwan Landco Pvt. Ltd. during the year under
consideration. The assessee filed return of income on 12.04.2022 in
response to notice u/s. 148, declaring total income of Rs.2,60,210/- as
long-term capital gain. The assessee further filed replies on 02.12.2022 and
12.12.2022 in response to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act and also filed the
details of sale consideration of the immovable property sold. However, the
transaction details, e.g., purchase/sale deed, supporting vouchers/ledgers,
computation of income, calculation of capital gains on the sale of
immovable property and details of the relevant bank statement, were not
submitted before the revenue authorities. Learned Assessing Officer,
accordingly treated the entire sale consideration of Rs.89,20,000/- as short
term capital gain and added to the income of the assessee.
Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals),
who, after considering assessee’s written submissions and evidences filed
on e-filing portal, confirmed the assessment order with the observation that
the assessee failed to adduce any supporting evidence in respect of the
said transaction to substantiate the working of the capital gain and further
to substantiate assesee’s claim that the said immovable property was
agricultural land.
Perused the records and heard learned AR for the assessee and ld.
DR for the Revenue. 2 | P a g e
ITA No.57/Agr/2025
Learned AR has made written submissions and argued that the
appellant is an agriculturist and sold the agricultural land for Rs.89.2 lakhs.
He had no knowledge in respect of the computer or the Income-tax portal.
The revenue has wrongly assessed the entire sale consideration as ‘short
term capital gain’ and further that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in
confirming the assessment order ex parte in violation of the provisions of
section 250(6) r.w.s. 250(4) of the Act. Prayed to set aside the impugned
order.
Learned DR has submitted that no transaction details were submitted
before any of the revenue authorities, hence, learned CIT(Appeals) has
rightly passed the impugned order.
The perusal of the three pages written submissions of the assessee
shows that the assessee’s main grievance appears to be in respect of
revenue not heeding to the assessee’s claim of capital gain on the sale of
immovable property, having regard to the inflation cost of indexation. We
also notice that for want of transaction details of the immovable property,
the entire sale consideration seems to have been treated by revenue as
short term capital gain.
Keeping the totality of facts and circumstances in view and in the
interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to afford an opportunity to the
appellant assessee to make his submissions afresh along with required 3 | P a g e
ITA No.57/Agr/2025
transaction details and computation of capital gain, keeping inflation cost of
index in view. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify such details and
thereafter pass an order afresh in accordance with law. We order
accordingly. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall ensure
the observance of the principles of natural justice. The impugned order is,
thus, set aside.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.08.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
