GURDEEP SINGH MATREJA,PAJIFOND, MARGAO, GOA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MARGAO

ITA 84/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Gurdeep Singh Matreja, the appellant, who appealed against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) concerning the denial of an exemption claim under section 54F(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) had initially found that the property sold by the assessee did not meet the holding period requirement of 36 months, thus denying the exemption and assessing the total income at Rs. 49,00,000. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision due to the assessee's non-compliance and non-appearance at the hearings. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to provide another opportunity to the assessee and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471243 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA REDDY.
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe
• Section: 144; 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos. 84/PAN/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13 ) Gurdeep Singh Matreja, Shop.no,4,Mathurashrav Pajifond, Margoa-403601, Goa. Vs . ITO-Ward-3 Margoa, Goa. . PAN .No. AGQPM5987N (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by None(letter 3-02-25) Revenue by Mr.Narendra Reddy.Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 04.02.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 05.02.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/sec 144 r.w.s147 and u/sec 250 of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business. The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA data, found that the assesse has sold property for Rs49 lakhs and has claimed the exemption u/sec54F(1) of the Act and the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. Further the assesse has filed the copy of purchase deed and sale 2 ITA. No. 84/PAN/2023 Gurdeep Singh Matreja.. deed. Whereas the A.O found that the period of holding of the assest sold is less than 36 months and the assessee is not eligible for claim of exemption u/sec54F of the Act and the explanations were called to substantiate the claim. Since, no explanations/details were filed, the AO considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of Sec. 144 of the Act and denied the claim of exemption and finally assessed the total income of Rs.49,00,000/- and passed the order u/sec 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 14.12.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assesse to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. We heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no compliance nor appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assesse is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The CIT(A) 3 ITA. No. 84/PAN/2023 Gurdeep Singh Matreja.. has issued the notices of hearing on 15.11.2022,19.01.2024,9.02.2024 and 20-02-2024 referred at Para 5 of the order and there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assesse has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the Appeal. And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assesse for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 05/02/2025 4 ITA. No. 84/PAN/2023 Gurdeep Singh Matreja.. Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 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 "