VARDAN CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 21/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 April 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding the reasons to be bona fide. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter for a fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order of the NFAC/CIT(A) which had dismissed their earlier appeal due to non-appearance. The assessee attributed the delay in filing the current appeal to not being aware of the earlier order's disposal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT was condonable and whether the ex-parte order of CIT(A) should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH ‘DB’ AGRA

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Shailender Srivastava, Sr. DR
Hearing: 03.04.2025Pronounced: 03.04.2025

Date of Hearing 03.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 03.04.2025 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM,

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 22.02.2023 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2012-13 arising out of order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’) dated 21.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Gwalior.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the appeal of the assessee is being decided after hearing the ld. Sr. DR and on the basis of material available on record.

3.

This appeal has been filed on 17.01.2025 against the order dated 22.02.2023 of the NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) which as per the appeal memo was received by the assessee on 25.02.2023. Therefore, there is delay about 21 months in filing of this appeal. The assessee has submitted the following reasons for the delay in filing the appeal:

“That the assessee filed appeal on 26/01/2019 against the reassessment order passed on 21/12/2018. There after assessee did not receiving any notice of hearing only when portal was logged for preparing application under vivad se viswas scheme 2024 it was noticed that order was passed on 22/02/2023 as the assessee was not aware about the disposal of appeal, the appeal is delay of 21 months looking to the facts of case your honour is requested to consonance the delay and accept appeal.” 3.1. We have considered the reasons for the said delay and found to be reasonable and bona fide. We, therefore, condone this delay and admit this appeal for hearing.

4.

Brief facts of the case: In this case, the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.03.2015 at the assessed income of Rs.16,81,270/- after making an addition of Rs.2 lakhs. Thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act after obtaining the approval from PCIT, Gwalior, wherein the information recorded in the reasons was that the assessee had sold an immovable property jointly owned with M/s Balkrishan Garg HUF for Rs.90,00,000/- and Short Term Capital Gain of Rs.11,81,680/- was offered. It was further noted by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded that the stamp duty valuation of the said property was Rs.2,22,82,500/- and 50% of the same being share of the assessee comes to Rs.1,11,41,250/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer referred to the provisions of section 50C of the Act and noted that the escapement of income was thereto the extent of Rs.21,41,250/-(Rs.1,11,41,250/- - Rs.90,00,000/-).

5.

During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer for the reasons stated in the assessment order disallowed the claim of expenses amounting to Rs.19,40,000/- and Rs.9,45,000/- under the head ‘Paid for boundary wall’ and ‘Levelling’ respectively. The Assessing Officer took the sale consideration at Rs.1,11,41,250/- (as against Rs.90 lakhs showin by the assessee) and allowed acquisition cost as on 07.01.2009 amounting to Rs.21,33,320/- and expenses (possession plus stamp duty) Rs.8 lakhs and determined the Short Term Capital Gain of the said property at Rs.82,07,930/-. The AO after noting the fact that the assessee had disclosed STCG of Rs.11,81,680/- and therefore, restricted the addition at Rs.70,26,250/-(Rs.82,07,930/- - Rs.11,81,680/-).

6.

Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on the ground that the assessee failed to appear on the date of hearing when the case were fixed for hearing and also the fact that no written submission in support of grounds of appeal were filed.

7. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

8. We have heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. From the perusal of the explanation for the reasons in the delay for filing of this appeal, we are of the view that there was bona fide reason for the assessee for his inability to attend the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is given to the assessee to represent its 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 and as per law. Further, the assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd April, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →