BINOD KUMAR KEDIA,GOPALGANJ V. ITO, WARD- 2 (4), SIWAN

ITA 72/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Binod Kumar Kedia, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issue was the non-disclosure of a significant difference between the sale consideration and the stamp duty value of a property transaction in the assessee's income tax return. The Assessing Officer had added this difference to the assessee's income, leading to an increased tax liability. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal as infructuous, stating it had already been disposed of. The ITAT found that the CIT(Appeals) had not adjudicated on specific grounds raised by the assessee and thus remitted the matter back for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713153 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 148; 142(1); 50C

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 72/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2013-2014) Binod Kumar Kedia 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 72/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Binod Kumar Kedia,……………...…….…………Appellant S/o LateJeevan Ram Kedia, Marwari Mohalla, Gopalganj-841428, Bihar [PAN:AFHPK1798P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-2(4), Siwan Appearances by: Shri K.P. Jalan, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: May 22, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17th December, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 on 24.12.2013 showing total income of Rs.1,77,290/-. The assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 72/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2013-2014) Binod Kumar Kedia 2 derives income from sale and karigari of ornament. As per AIR information, the assesese sold a land on 24.04.2012 on consideration value of land at Rs.9,70,000/- and stamp duty value of the said property was Rs.31,86,000/-. The assessee has shown income in his return of income under the head “income from business” only. As per U/s 50C of the Act, the difference of consideration received and value of stamp duty was deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. As the assessee has not shown difference amount of Rs.22,16,000/- (Rs.31,86,000/- minus Rs.9,70,000/-) in his return of income, the ld. Assessing Officer issued a letter to the assessee on 04.06.2014. In compliance of the notice, the assessee failed to explain that why he has not shown the difference amount in his return of income. Notices under section 148 and 142(1) were issued by the ld. Assessing Officer requiring details of land and payment details with mode of payment but the assessee did not comply to the notices issued to him. The ld. Assessing Officer left with no other option, completed the assessment assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.24,05,540/- (Rs.22,28,248/- minus Rs.9,57,752/- plus the returned income of Rs.1,77,290/). 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) disposed off the appeal vide order under section 250 dated 18.12.2018 with certain directions to the ld. Assessing Officer and when assessee filed in Form no. 35 only one ground of appeal, which recorded at sr. no. 13 of Form no. 35, pleading therein - Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 72/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2013-2014) Binod Kumar Kedia 3 “consequential demand and uploading of the consequential demand of Rs.7,55,720/- is void ab initio and wholly illegal and fit to be quashed”. Further at Sr. No. 15 of Form No. 35, states “demand u/s 250 was uploaded on 30.03.2019 without uploading of any order and written request filed for such order to file appeal before CIT(A), Muzaffarpur on 01.05.2019, but was not still received. Therefore, delay in filing of appeal is for 10 days and prayed for condonation”. The ld. CIT(Appeals) opined that the sequence of facts clearly indicates that for the impugned assessment year there is no appeal left for adjudication as the same has already been disposed vide order under section 250 dated 18.12.2018, if the appellant has any further grievance against the order of CIT(Appeals), he may file before the Hon’ble ITAT. Since there is no matter for adjudication in Form No. 35 filed by the assesese in the form of appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee being infructuous. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. 5. I have heard both the sides. At the outset, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has not adjudicated the Grounds No. 3 & 4, which were Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 72/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2013-2014) Binod Kumar Kedia 4 filed in Form No. 35 before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and remit the matter back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer. 6. On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the ld. CIT(Appeals) considered all the submissions and dismissed the assessee’s appeal saying that “there is no appeal left for adjudication as the same has already been disposed vide order under section 250 dated 18.12.2018. If the appellant has any further grievance against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals), then the next appeal shall be filed before the Hon’ble Tribunal (ITAT)”. Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 7. I have perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has raised Grounds No. 3 & 4 before the ld. CIT(Appeals), which is as under:- “3. That on appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) vide order dated 18.12.2018 in Appel No. 216/JSR/2017-18 has been pleased to direct the Assessing Officer to refer the matter to Departmental Valuation Cell and then work out the short-0term capital gain in terms of provisions of section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act. 4. That the ld. CIT(Appeals) has also directed the Assessing Officer to enquire the source of purchase of the property so sold. 8. Upon perusal of the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), it is an admitted fact that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has not adjudicated these two grounds. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 72/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2013-2014) Binod Kumar Kedia 5 remit the matter back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer to examine these issues afresh and pass a speaking order after providing one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/07/2025. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 28th day of July, 2025 Copies to :(1) Binod Kumar Kedia, S/o LateJeevan Ram Kedia, Marwari Mohalla, Gopalganj-841428, Bihar (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Siwan (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com "