DILIP NAMDEO BHOIR ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 3(2), KALYAN

ITA 29/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dilip Namdeo Bhoir, who appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which assessed him under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The NFAC had treated a development agreement entered into by the assessee with a builder as a sale of immovable property, resulting in a long-term capital gain assessment of Rs. 2,13,15,000. The assessee argued that he was unaware of the faceless assessment process and did not respond to notices sent through the ITBA portal, leading to an exparte order from the CIT(A). Both parties agreed to remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26516 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.R. MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHEKHER PATWARDHAN
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.29/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year :2019-20) Dilip Namdeo Bhoir Ganesh Niwas Shreeram Nagar Chikanghar Kalyan (W) Maharashtra- 421 304 Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre / ITO Ward-3(2), Kalyan PAN/GIR No.AMTPB7100P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Shekher Patwardhan Revenue by Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing 19/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement /02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 13/12/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 for the A.Y.2019-20. 2. Before us ld. Counsel submitted that assessee is an individual who had entered into a development agreement with the builder which was erroneously considered to be sale of immovable property and accordingly, additions have been ITA No. 29/Mum/2025 Dilip Namdeo Bhoir 2 made of Rs.2,13,15,000/- on account of sale of immovable property under the head ‘long term capital gain’ despite assessee has not sold any such property and has merely entered into a development agreement. He further stated that since assessee was not well versed with faceless system nor was he aware of any notices being sent through ITBA portal, therefore, he could not respond to any such notices nor he was aware of any such re-assessment proceedings being initiated. Before the ld. CIT(A) assessee sought for adjournment. However, the same was not considered and ld. CIT(A) too has passed exparte order without deciding it on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, he submitted that matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. AO. 3. Ld. DR also is not having any objection if the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. AO. 4. After considering the aforesaid submissions and looking to the facts which has been narrated before us, it is seen that the notices sent and reflected in the income tax portal was not responded as assessee was not aware of that assessment proceedings will be conducted in faceless manner and notices would be sent through ITBA portal because assessee was illiterate and had not filed the return of income. Even before the ld. CIT(A), the authorized representative of the assessee had filed the adjournment on the income tax portal, however, the ld. CIT(A) without considering the same has passed an exparte order on 13/12/2024. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and to examine the contention of the assessee that ITA No. 29/Mum/2025 Dilip Namdeo Bhoir 3 there was no sale of immovable property during the year and it was only development agreement, ld. AO is directed to examine his contention and pass afresh assessment order. Assessee is also directed to participate in the proceedings and substantiate his case before the ld. AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. AO to decide in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on February, 2025. (PADMAVATHY S) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated /02/2025 KARUNA, sr.ps ITA No. 29/Mum/2025 Dilip Namdeo Bhoir 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS/P S 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed Yes 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "