SAULET SHAFEEQ,BHOPAL vs. ITO NFAC, DELHI

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 20.12.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 22.03.2022 passed by learned NFAC, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2015-16, the assessee has filed this appeal.

It further emerged during hearing that the AO, while completing assessment, has made an addition of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- on account of Short-term Capital Gain from sale of property by assessee without giving deduction of cost of acquisition. Thus, the income of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- assessed by AO is against the very scheme of the Act which prescribes that the taxable capital gain shall be computed after deducting cost incurred by assessee. Ld. DR, however, submitted that the AO has noted in assessment- order “In absence of details/evidence in support of cost of acquisition of the immovable property sold out, the same is taken at Rs. Nil.” but still could not dispute that taxing entire sale-proceed as capital gain without giving deduction of cost to assessee is against the scheme of act and unsustainable.

Ld. AR at that stage submitted that the assessee is ready and willing to make necessary submission before AO if an opportunity is given by re- storing the matter at the level of AO. Accordingly, Ld. AR prays that the Page 2 of 3 the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for a proper adjudication on merit after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier order in any manner. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.