SUNDEEP MISRA,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 32(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6248/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 July 2021AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not discussed the documents submitted by the assessee. To ensure justice, the case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 54F for the sale of a property, declaring a long-term capital gain. The Assessing Officer disallowed the exemption due to non-filing of complete details and made an addition to the total income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the documents submitted by the assessee while disallowing the exemption under Section 54F. Whether the assessee was given adequate opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI O.P. KANT & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Senior DR
Hearing: 05.07.2021

PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

Appellant, Shri Sundeep Misra (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Revenue’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 21.08.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-11, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2013-14 on the grounds inter alia that :-

“Assessing officer has neither considered documents, nor other statement filed nor has he considered AR representation. It seems that for the reasons based known to him has decided to do this case on assumption basis rather than going through the papers submitted. It clearly shows bad intention of AO to harass assessee and his AR who have regularly not only co operated but also submitted and attended the case as and when required to do so.

AO has considered Deduction Claimed U/s 54 and calculated the Income. Case was decided by AO and demand was raised accordingly. We request your honour to set aside this order and cancel the demand, interest and penalty proceedings and call for fresh assessment.”

2.

Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Assessee has claimed to have sole the property for Rs.87,18,500/- during the year under assessment by declaring long term capital gain of Rs.53,34,951/- and claimed exemption thereof. Assessing Officer (AO), declining the contentions raised by the assessee and due to non-filing of complete details called for by the AO, proceeded to disallow the exemption of Rs.52,50,000/- claimed by the assessee u/s 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and made addition thereof to the total income of the assessee.

3.

Assessee carried the matter by way of appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who has confirmed the appeal by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal.

4.

Assessee has not preferred to put in appearance despite issuance of the notice and consequently, we proceeded to decide the present appeal with the assistance of the ld. DR as well as on the basis of documents available on the file.

5.

We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative for the revenue to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case.

6.

Bare perusal of the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) goes to show that though the ld. CIT (A) has shown to have disposed off the appeal on merits but none of the documents claimed by the assessee before the AO has been discussed and rejected for claiming exemption u/s 54F of the Act. No doubt, the assessee has failed to appear before the ld. CIT (A) despite giving many opportunities but to decide the issue once for all, one more opportunity is required to be given to the assessee to argue his case.

So, to achieve the ends of justice, the case is remitted back to the ld. CIT (A) to decide afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on this 5th day of July, 2021 after the conclusion of the virtual hearing.

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →