KAILAS CHIMANBHAI POKAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-3(3)(10)), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1220/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 October 2024AY 2012-13Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order despite the assessee seeking an adjournment. Both parties agreed that the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of LTCG exemption. The assessee had previously withdrawn their appeal before the CIT(A) and later sought its restoration. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order after ignoring the assessee's request for adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's request for adjournment and whether the appeal should be restored for de-novo adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(38)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL

For Appellant: Ms. Rachhna Khandhar, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, S.R.-DR
Hearing: 15.10.2024

Date of Hearing 15.10.2024 15.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 10.04.2024 passed for A.Y. 2012-13.

2.

The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

“1. The CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 5702390/- being LTCG exemption u/s 10(38) of IT Act, 1961. 2. The CIT(A) further erred both in law and on facts in observing that the transactions are not genuine transactions but are arranged with a view to buying entries of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares, date of purchase and rate of purchase were arranged afterwards.

3.

The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming various observations in the assessment order which are irrelevant and untenable when appellant had cooperated with AO by furnishing all the evidences and answers on facts which ought to be considered which AO has filed to considered.

4. The CIT(A) which erred in passing the order by way of withdrawing the appeal eventhough the appellant had made an application for restoration of appeal.” 3. On going through the records we find that the assessee has withdrawn the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) vide letter dated 23.12.2019 and also sought restoration of appeal vide letter dated 25.02.2021.

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) passed order on 10.04.2024 after sending letter to the assessee on 09.01.2024 for submitting the reply on the same date i.e. 19.01.2024. The assessee sought adjournment on 19.01.2024 which has been ignored by the Ld. CIT(A) which led to passing of an ex-parte order.

5.

The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A).

6.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the Ld. CIT(A).

7.

In response, the Ld. D.R. placed reliance on the observations made by Ld. CIT(A) in the order passed by him.

8.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record.

9.

Both the parties fairly prayed that the matter may restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication.

10.

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

This Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 15/10/2024

Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 15/10/2024 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 10(38)

All 3,113 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(38) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →