What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the AO. The AO is directed to pass a speaking order after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to file evidence.

The assessee declared a long-term capital loss due to compulsory acquisition of land and building. The assessment was completed under Section 144 as the assessee remained unrepresented before the Assessing Officer (AO). The assessee claims notices were not received due to transfers.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order passed under Section 144 is valid without proper service of notice and opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the capital gains/loss arising from compulsory acquisition of property is taxable.

Hem Dass, Mandi vs ITO | ITAT Chandigarh 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC, CHANDIGARH

Before: MS. DIVA SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Inder Mohan

For Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

Hearing: 09/01/2018Pronounced: 12.03.2018

PER DIVA SINGH, J.M.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 05/10/2016 of CIT-A -1 Amritsar Camp Palam PUr (HP).

The Ld. AR, at the time of hearing inviting attention to the original grounds raised in the present appeal submitted that the assessee may be permitted to submit these with the revised grounds which have been placed on record. The Ld. Sr. DR on considering the revised grounds had no objection if the substitution is permitted as nothing fresh, it was stated has been raised by the assessee in the revised grounds. In the light of the submissions of the parties before the Bench the original grounds raised by the assessee are substituted by the revised grounds which read as under:

That the appeal may be fully allowed and the year of indexation may be declared as the year of receiving the award amount.

That order of Ld. A.O. may be declared as null and void as there was no proper service of the appellants.

That the said case property of the appellant may be declared as ancestral property and there is no tax chargeable on this property.

That the solatium may be declared as not taxable in the said case.

That appellants’ residential property u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 may also be considered.

ITA 175/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 3. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee declared an income of Rs. 98,963/- declaring a long term capital loss on account of compulsory acquisition of land and building. The said return was selected for scrutiny. The assessment proceedings were concluded by an order under section 144 as the assessee remained unrepresented before the assessing officer.

The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT-A which order is challenged in the present proceedings.

The Ld. AR at the time of hearing submitted that the assessee is a retired employee and had received the money in 2000 on his property being acquired and thereafter had left the property. The return was filed when he was in a government police job at Bilaspur. Thereafter he was transferred to office of S.P. Shimla and the notice which may have been sent to Bilaspur was never received. The issues for adjudication, it was submitted are covered by the decision dated 15.12.2017 of the coordinate Bench in the case of Tara Gupta (ITA No. 207/CHD/2017) which order has been followed in many cases. Accordingly, it was his prayer that the issue may be remanded to the AO in order to address the facts and thereafter for a decision on merits in the light of the said decision.

The ld. Sr.DR had no objection to the said prayer.

I have heard the submissions and perused the material. In the light of the submissions of the parties before the Bench, the impugned order is set aside back the file of the assessing officer with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is also directed that the assessee be permitted to file any evidence as it seeks to place in support of its claim and the assessing officer shall pass an order thereafter in accordance with law. Said order was pronounced at the time of hearing itself.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12th March,2018. (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER

AG/Poonam Copy to: The Appellant, The Respondent, The CIT, The CIT(A), The DR

Asstt.

HEM DASS,MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BILASPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments