GANGADHAR,ALIAGRH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALIGARH

ITA 199/AGR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the legal heir of a deceased assessee, Gangadhar, against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which was based on a best judgment assessment due to the non-filing of income tax returns for the assessment year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer had reopened the case under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, following the sale of immovable property by the assessee. The appeal to the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex parte, leading to the current appeal. The tribunal found that the ex parte order was passed without proper opportunity of hearing, violating the principles of natural justice, and thus remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772034 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASSESSEE; LEARNED; REVENUE; ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: AVAN KUMAR SINGH
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice; Assessment record
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 199/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Gangadhar (deceased) through Legal heir Satish Chand, Kasimpur Ka Nagla, Kasimpur, Aligarh (UP) Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Aligarh. PAN : BFZPG6605L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Avan Kumar Singh, CA Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.08.2025 ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed on behalf of the assessee, Gangadhar (deceased) through legal representative, Shri Satish Chand against the impugned order dated 07.06.2023 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A) Aligarh/10027/2018-19 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. At the very outset, we notice through registry report that this appeal was filed on 11.04.2025 against the impugned order dated 07.06.2023 by a Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.199/Agr/2025 2 | P a g e delay of about 613 days. Ld. AR has submitted, in accordance with the contents of delay condonation application, that the assessee died on 11.05.2021 and the legal representative of the deceased assessee had no knowledge of the impugned order. The legal representative came to know about the same when demand notice was received. An affidavit has also been filed in support of the delay condonation application. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay. 3. Brief facts state that the assessee did not file return of income for A.Y. 2012-13. According to the information available with the department, the appellant was found to have sold immovable property for Rs.1,21,36,800/-, stamp value of which, according to the government valuation, was Rs.93,36,800/-. Case was reopened u/s. 147 and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued. The appellant assessee did neither respond nor file any return of income in response thereof. Learned Assessing Officer, thus carried out ‘best judgment assessment’ u/s. 144 of the Act by computing long term capital gain on sale of immovable property and assessed total income at Rs.78,61,690/-. 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.199/Agr/2025 3 | P a g e 5. This second appeal has been filed on the ground, in addition to others, that the impugned ex parte order has been passed without affording proper opportunity of hearing in violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. Perused the records and heard learned AR for assessee and learned DR for revenue. 7. Learned AR submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed exparte impugned order without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. Learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. It transpires from the perusal of the assessment record that due to irresponsive conduct of the assessee learned Assessing Officer was compelled to pass best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. Similarly, ld. CIT(Appeals) was also compelled to pass ex parte impugned order due to non-submission on behalf of the assessee despite various notices dated 24.02.2021, 09.07.2021, 13.08.2021 and 18.05.2023 issued to the appellant through ITBA Portal. Such an irresponsive conduct of the assessee is unacceptable, however, in the totality of facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to afford an opportunity to the appellant assessee to make his submissions before the Assessing Officer. The matter is thus remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for passing order afresh in accordance with law after Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.199/Agr/2025 4 | P a g e taking assessee’s submissions into consideration. We further deem it just and appropriate to observe that learned Assessing Officer shall take notice of the fact of the death of the assessee, treating the assessment through legal representative of the deceased assessee. We order accordingly. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly. 10. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dated 07.06.2023 stands set aside. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.08.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "