VATSALA RANGNATH KATHE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 843/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 February 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to plead and prove the cost of acquisition at their own risk and responsibility.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 involved capital gains of Rs. 15 lakhs added to the total sale consideration of Rs. 60 lakhs. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the NFAC determined the cost of acquisition of the capital asset.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in adding capital gains without determining the cost of acquisition of the asset. The lack of determination of the cost of acquisition by the revenue authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [VIRTUAL HEARING]

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 27.02.2024Pronounced: 27.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.843/PUN./2023 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2011-2012 Shri Vatsala Rangnath The Income Tax Officer, Kathe, Kathe Farm Tidke Ward – 1 (1), Income Tax Office Nagar, Near Priyanka Park, Kendriya Rajaswa Bhavan, Ram Ontawadi, Nashik vs. Ganesh Gadkari Chowk, Old PIN – 422 008 Agra Road, Nashik-422002. PAN BRDPK0968E Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pramod Shingte For Revenue : Shri Gaurav K Singh Date of Hearing : 27.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.02.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1043916799(1), dated 19.07.2022, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties representing through their learned representatives that both the learned lower authorities have added capital gains amount of Rs.15 lakhs @ 25% of the total sale consideration amounting to Rs.60 lakhs; in assessment order dated 21.12.2016 as upheld in the NFAC’s discussion. Mr. Gaurav Singh

2 ITA.No.843/PUN./2023 could hardly dispute the clinching fact that neither the learned Assessing Officer nor the NFAC have taken any steps to determine the cost of acquisition of the assessee’s capital asset transferred in the relevant previous year. That being the case, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the learned Assessing Officer for his afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that assessee shall plead and prove the foregoing cost of acquisition at his own risk and responsibility in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

4.

These assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.02.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →