DIPIKA KIRITBHAI PRAJAPATI,GANDHINAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD-4 PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-1, MEHSANA

ITA 721/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dipika Kiritbhai Prajapati, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary issues in the appeal were the alleged failure of the CIT(A) to provide an adequate opportunity for the appellant to be heard and the incorrect calculation of Long Term Capital Gain by not deducting the cost of acquisition and its indexation from the sale price of the land. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not furnished necessary details or explanations at both the assessment and appellate stages, leading to the dismissal of the initial appeal by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, considering the request for a fair opportunity to present the case, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780513 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHAKAR VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRITESH L SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Cost of acquisition; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.721/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dipika Kiritbhai Prajapati, 149, Nathiba Sadan, Vardhman Nagar Society, Kalol, Gandhinagar-382721. [PAN :AUBPP3295 R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, (Present Jurisdiction Ward-1) Mehsana. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Pritesh L Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 10.10.2025 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER :- The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 03.02.2025 relevant to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not granting the adequate opportunity of being 1 heard to the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings, such opportunity should have been granted in the interest of justice. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 721/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2– 2. The learned AO erred in not granting the deduction of cost of acquisition and indexation thereof from the sale price of the land while calculating the Long Term Capital Gain and learned CIT(A) erred in confirming such action of AO, such cost of acquisition and indexation thereof is requested to be granted. Additional Ground The learned AO erred in not granting the deduction of cost of acquisition and indexation thereof from the sale price of the land while calculating the Long Term Capital Gain and learned CIT(A) erred in confirming such action of AO, such cost of acquisition and indexation thereof is requested to be granted. Your appellant prays for leave to add, to alter and/or to amend the above ground before the final hearing of appeal. 3. On perusal of the record, we find that the assessee was granted sufficient opportunities of hearing to furnish details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate the “Capital Gains” arising from the sale of land in which assessee’s share was 16.66%. However, assessee failed to furnish any requisite details or explanations before the Ld.CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. We also find that the assessee even failed to submit any details/supporting evidence regarding sale of land before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 721/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3– statement /submission/document/evidence before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 10.10.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) VICE-PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 10.10.2025 MV आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "