ANMOL LAND DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI V. NFAC, DELHI (I.T.O. WARD 20(1)(1), MUMBAI), MUMBAI

ITA 173/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anmol Land Developers appealing against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had affirmed an assessment order adding Rs. 4,37,50,540 to the assessee's income due to a discrepancy between the purchase consideration and the market value of a property. The assessee contended that they did not receive the notices for the hearings, leading to their non-appearance and non-compliance. The Tribunal found that despite the assessee's claims, there was no substantial evidence provided to prove the non-receipt of notices. However, considering the circumstances, the Tribunal decided to remand the case for a fresh decision with specific conditions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24113 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM KRISHN KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: TEJAS CHANDARANA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.173/MUM/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) ANMOL LAND DEVELOPERS 292, Dudhwala House, Bellasis Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai Vs. ITO Ward-20(1)(1), Mumbai स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AAOFA 3173 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Tejas Chandarana, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : /02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM: This appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the order dated 22.10.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’) under 24 ITA No.173/Mum/2025 2 section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2018-2019. 2. In this case, the Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 13.05.2023, passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act, has made the addition of Rs.4,37,50,540/- on account of difference in value of purchase consideration and market value, as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b)/50C of the Act and added the same in the income of the assessee. 3. The Assessee being aggrieved though challenged the said addition before the ld. CIT(A), however despite affording two opportunities by issuing notices on 06.06.2024 & 26.07.2024, neither made any compliance nor sought any adjournment, therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the Assessee and eventually affirmed the assessment order by holding that no interference is noticed in the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. The assessee being aggrieved challenged the impugned order before this Court and submitted that the assessee did not receive any notice as mentioned by the ld. Commissioner either on email i.e. [e-mail] or in any physical mode and, therefore, the Hon'ble Court is requested to afford one opportunity by remanding the case to the file of the ld. ITA No.173/Mum/2025 3 Commissioner, may be by imposing reasonable conditions/cost. 5. On the contrary, ld. Sr. DR refuted the claim of the Assessee, by drawing our attention to the assessment order wherein the Assessee except responding to one notice dated 19.01.2023 u/s.142(1) of the Act, eventually made no compliance and/or not responded various notices sent by the AO. 6. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record and considered the submissions of the parties and the orders passed by the authorities below. The Assessee except filing an affidavit has failed to file any document to establish that it did not receive any such notices as mentioned by the ld. Commissioner in the impugned order. On being asked about non-appearance before the AO, the assessee except saying that notices issued by the AO have also not been received by the assessee either on the email or in physical mode, offered no plausible explanation, therefore, in our view the Assessee is not entitled for any leniency. However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in totality, as the issue involved in ITA No.173/Mum/2025 4 this case remained to be adjudicated in its right prospective and proper manner, specifically in the absence of relevant documents and submissions, which the Assessee failed to file before the ld. Commissioner specifically and therefore the ld. Commissioner in the constrained circumstances dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine but not on merit. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and conduct of the assessee, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of token cost of Rs.5500/- in the revenue department under “other heads” within 15 days from the receipt of the order and without claiming any deduction or disallowance on the said amount. Suffice to say the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 6.1 The Assessee is also directed to comply with the notices in future and to file the relevant documents for proper adjudication of the issue{s} involved by the Ld. Commissioner. We hereby clarify that in case of any subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. ITA No.173/Mum/2025 5 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/02/2025. Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रनिलिपि अग्रेपर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अधर्करण, म ुंबई/ ITAT, Mumbai 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- . Anmol Land Developers 292, Dudhwala House, Bellasis Road, Mumbai Central Mumbai 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- ITO Ward-20(1)(1), Mumbai 3. आयकि आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. निभागीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकि अपीलीय अनर्किण, म ुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// "