ANUPAMA NIRAL DESAI,VADODARA V. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

ITA 1548/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Anupama Niral Desai, the appellant, who contested the addition of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) to her income for the Assessment Year 2010-11, as determined by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the CIT(A). The primary contention was regarding the date of property transfer and the validity of an unregistered sale agreement dated 24.06.1974. The Assessing Officer considered the date of registration of the sale deed on 24.06.2009 for calculating LTCG, which the CIT(A) upheld. The appellant argued that the lower authorities did not adequately consider her submissions or grant sufficient opportunity for hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25806 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHAKAR VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIR AL MARFATIA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 143(3); 142(1); 50C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. No.1548/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Anupama Niral Desai, 31-32 Upkar Society Audhavpura, Nr. Harina Ellora Park, Vadodara-390007. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Vadodara. [PAN No.AMVPD9416G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Viral Marfatia, AR Respondent by: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.03.2025 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Appeal Centre vide order dated 21.06.2024 passed for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- (1) That, the Appellate Order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law/facts, illegal, without jurisdiction, and needs to be quashed. ITA No. 1548/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 2– (2) That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law/facts by adding Income u/s. 50 C. (3) That the Addition was made without considering reply of the Appellant, without reference being made u/s. 55A. Thus, the entire addition was made against the natural justice and need to be deleted. (4) That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in calculation of proportionate share of the appellant and made addition in total income. (5) That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in rejecting the validity of agreement to sale dt. 24/06/1974 and rejecting the possession being handed over to purchaser against the merits and facts of the case. (6) That, the Appellant reserves its right to add, alter, modify or delete any of the Grounds of Appeal hereunto taken before. 3. The brief facts of the case are that as per the information received from AIR, the appellant had sold immovable property for a consideration of Rs.86,15,100/- during the financial year 2009-10, but had not declared the same filing the return of income to the Department. Accordingly with a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 with prior approval of the concerned authority. In response to the same, the appellant filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.32,906/- and Long Term Capital loss of Rs.51,043/-. Subsequently, notices u/s 143(3) and 142(1) were also issued to the appellant, to which the appellant had submitted the required information. After considering the submissions filed by the appellant, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ITA No. 1548/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 3– u/s 143(3)r.w.s. 147 of the Act by determining the LTCG at Rs.4,30,760/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer by observing as under: “…5.1 I have gone through the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant contended that the agreement of sale was executed on 24.06.1974 and possession was also handed over to the buyer and hence the transfer of property was effected from 24.06.1974 and registration of sale dated 24.06.2009 was a mere execution of deal. From a perusal of copy of agreement of sale dated 24.06.1974, it is revealed that it was not registered. An unregistered document is not a valid document as per statute. And nowhere in the agreement of sale, the issue of possession of property was mentioned. Even on the other hand, the appellant failed to prove that real possession took place i.e., the appellant failed to furnish any proof like payment of electricity bill or property tax bill, etc., in the name of the buyer. In the absence of any substantiating documentary evidence, it is not tenable that agreement of sale dated 24.06.1974 was valid. In view of the above, the action of the Assessing Officer taking into consideration the date of Registration of Sale Deed as on 24.06.2009 and calculating the LTCG accordingly is in order and no interference is required. Accordingly, the addition made on account of LTCG amounting to Rs.4,30,760/- is confirmed…” 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that both the lower authorities have passed the ITA No. 1548/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 4– order without considering the submission/documents and not granting adequate opportunity of hearing. The Assessing Officer made addition on account of 50C in the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. The NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by holding that assessee had not filed any substantiating document. The Ld.AR for the assessee prayed before us that assessee has a case if one more opportunity be given to explain the facts and documents before the revenue authorities. Having gone through the fact, we hold that no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the Assessing Officer is allowed to examine the details/submission and take decision as per the provision of the Act. The assessee shall submit all necessary documents and comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking unnecessary adjournments. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes This Order pronounced in Open Court on 12.03.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 12.03.2025 Manish, Sr. PS ITA No. 1548/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 5– TRUE COPY आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "