JITENDRA VADILAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 906/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 January 2024AY 2021-22Bench: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) mentioned a notice for furnishing information, but it was unclear if this notice was served. In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard and submit evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption for Rs. 25,50,000/- from the sale of rural agricultural land. The Assessing Officer added this amount as short-term capital gain due to lack of documentary evidence. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without proper service of notice and opportunity for the assessee to submit evidence regarding the sale of agricultural land.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Mitul A. Ruparayl, CA
For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01.01.2024Pronounced: 17.01.2024

This appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2021-22.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

“1. The order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (NFAC) Delhi is bad in law and contrary to the provision of law and facts. It is submitted that the same be held so now.

2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (NFAC) Delhi has grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.25,50,000/- on the ground that documents were not submitted with the written submission. However, all documents were duly uploaded with the written submission on the portal which are still available on the portal.

3. The appellant filed his return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 on 11.12.2021 declaring total income Rs.25,870/- and claiming receipt on sale of rural agriculture land of Rs.25,50,000/-as exempt receipt. While fling the return of income the sale proceeds from rural agricultural land was filed in the ITR form as agriculture receipt and claimed exempt. During the assessment proceedings, it was Assessment Year: 2021-22 Page 2 of 3 clarified by the appellant that the receipt of Rs.25,50,000/- was the amount of sale proceeds of rural agriculture land. The assessing accepting the fact as receipt of Rs.25,50,000/-was sale proceeds of agriculture land. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.25,50,000/- being the sale consideration of rural agriculture land as short-term capital gain in the absence of documentary evidences of agriculture land. The appellant also reserves his right to submit all the details in connection with the addition as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the IT Rule 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. Being aggrieved by the addition so made in assessment, interest charged and initiation of penalty proceedings, the appellant prefers appeal on the accompanied grounds,”

3.

The assessee filed return of income on 11.12.2021 declaring total income of Rs.25,870/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny to verify the issue related to large agricultural income where the return of income for last two Assessment Years was not filed. Since the assessee has not filed any details except the reply dated 20.08.2022 the Assessment Order was passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 thereby making addition of Rs.25,50,000/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain (STCG).

4.

Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has not received any notice from the CIT(A) related to notice dated 06.09.2023 for furnishing information sought which is mentioned in paragraph no.5.1.1 of the order of the CIT(A). Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the assessee be given opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) and allowing the assessee to file the details as called upon.

6.

The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) mentioned in the notice dated 06.09.2023 for furnishing cetin information by the assessee, but there is no mention as to whether this notice was served to the assessee or not. The contention of the Ld. AR that notice was not received is taken into account and in Assessment Year: 2021-22 Page 3 of 3 the interest of justice it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the evidences asked for by the CIT(A). The additional evidences filed before the CIT(A) and before the Tribunal are admitted. The CIT(A) is directed to take cognizance of the said evidence and adjudicate the matter/issues as per law. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of being heard.

8.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 17th January, 2024.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →