LATA SHARMA,AGRA vs. CIT (APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to represent her case before the CIT(A). The order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to his file.
What were the facts?
The assessee sold an immovable property for Rs. 32,00,000, with a market value of Rs. 39,11,000 under Section 50C. The assessee did not file a return, and long-term capital gains were not declared for taxation. The assessment was completed ex-parte under Section 144.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 54 of the Act, and whether the ex-parte order by CIT(A) needs to be set aside for another opportunity.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
Date of Hearing 04.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.04.2025 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM,
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 15.12.2023 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2012-13 arising out of order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’) dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Agra.
Brief facts of the case: The assessee is an individual and sold a property situated at Agra. In this case the AO received information that the assessee had sold an immovable property at Agra for consideration of Rs.32,00,000/-, which had a market value under Section 50C amounting to Rs.39,11,000/- during the relevant year. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had not filed a return for the year under consideration, and it was also noted that the long-term capital gains from this transaction had not been declared for taxation. The assessment in this case was completed u/s 144 of the Act, wherein, the Assessing Officer denied the exemption u/s 54 of the Act.
Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee, during the hearing before us submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, and requested that the matter may be set-aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee had purchased a residential property against the said sale of property situated at Agra and the assessee is liable for deduction u/s 54 of the Act, which was denied by the Assessing Officer.
The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
Having heard both the parties, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent her case effectively before the ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, set-aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file to pass an order afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Further, the assessee is also directed to represent her case before the ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 4th April, 2025.
More judgments on Section 50C
- M N S Barium Salts, Kadapa vs ITO, Ward-1, KadapaITA 2412/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sawalchand Chunilal Bafna HUF, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer-16(1)(1), MumbaiITA 7492/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Jagdishbhai Vasharambhai Italiya, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 150/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Rohini Ramhari Bhadale, Pune vs Assessing Officer Ward 2(2) Pune, PuneITA 2767/PUN/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Sweta Somani, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 44(2), KolkataITA 1656/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
