SHRI. INDERJIT SINGH, JALANDHAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), JALANDHAR

ITA 321/ASR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7081 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: INDERJI T SINGH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH BOARAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. No: 321/Asr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 ) Shri Inderjit Singh, S/o Late Shri Harbans Singh, R/o H.No. 237, Near Gurudwara, VPO Reru, Jalandhar PAN No. DGNPS1841B V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(2), Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri P. N. Arora, Adv., Respondent by : Shri Inderjit Singh, CIT/DR (आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश)/ORDER Date of hearing : 03-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03 -12-2021 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, J.M. 1. This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (‘hereinafter called CIT(A)’) order no. CIT-1/JAL/10194/2017-18 order dated 22/03/2019 arising out of assessment order dated 18/12/2017. ITA No. 321/Asr/2019 . A.Y. 2010-11 2 2. The Assessee has taken solely that lower authority has grossly erred in making the addition of Rs. 1,68,00,000/- on account of so-called undisclosed long term capital gain. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income. Thereafter, his case for scrutiny for assessment year 2010-11 was selected u/s. 147 of the Act on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing (sale of immovable properties worth Rs. 1,68,00,000/- and after recording the satisfaction, Ld. A.O. issued notice to the assessee but none appeared pursuance to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Since, there was no co- operation at the end of the assessee, Ld. A.O. made addition of Rs. 1,68,00,000/- on the basis of information and documents were forwarded by the Investigation Wing of the department. 4. Thereafter, assesee preferred first statutory appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and during the proceedings before the lower authorities, assessee did not provide details of cost of acquisition of the properties and it was not known to the lower authorities whether properties were acquired by the assessee before 01.04.1991 are not. Since no details of acquisition of properties were filed by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Ld. Assessing Officer. 5. Now assessee has come before us. At the outset, Ld. A.R. requested case may kindly be set aside to the AO as assessee is a farmer and his income was below the tax limit and he was not aware about the Income Tax proceedings. Therefore he could not file the relevant details before the lower authorities. 6. Thus, in the interest of justice, we set aside this matter back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to decide this matter afresh after considering the date of ITA No. 321/Asr/2019 . A.Y. 2010-11 3 acquisition of the property and relevant details to be furnished by the assessee on which basis case to be adjudicated. Needless to mention here that assessee shall cooperate with the Ld. A.O. and shall supply all the relevant detail and information for speedy disposal of the case. Thereafter Ld. A.O. shall decide the matter as per law. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in Open Court on 03- 12- 2021 (MANISH BORAD) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 0312/2021 Copy of the Order forwarded to:- 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT (Appeals) – 4. The CIT concerned. 5. The DR., ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. Guard File. By ORDER Deputy/Asstt.Registrar ITAT,Amritsar