Zenab Bai Bohra , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 3397/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8912 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 50C; 142(1); 250; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES B BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI JASON P BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA. NO. 3397 /BANG/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 8 - 0 9) SMT. ZENAB BAI BOHRA, OLD 12/2 NEW NO.1109/3 - 2, 47 TH CROSS, 5 TH BLOCK, J P NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 PAN: AGVPB 1435D VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 7(2)(1), BANGALORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI DEEPAK CHOPRA, C.A. REVENUE BY: SHRI R. N. SIDDAPPAJI, ADDL. CIT (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 27.06 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 .07 .2019 O R D E R PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7 , BANGALORE PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S. 147 AND 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2 ITA NO. 3397 /BANG/2018 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IS EXPART E ORDER . 3. THE B RIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING THE AGRICULTURE DRY LANDS WHICH ARE AND SOLD TO TRUST AS PER THE SALE DEED DT.20.12.2007 AND W HEREAS THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPL IED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT BECAUSE THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF SRO AND THE SALE CONSIDERATION. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED UNDE R SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) WAS ISSUE D FOR SUBMITTING THE DETAILS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS VERIFIED THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AND SINCE THERE WAS NO PROPER COMP LIANCE IN SUBMITTING THE F U R T H E R DETAILS, MADE B EST JUDGEMENT A SSESSMENT AND DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,20,73,980 AND PASSED ORDER UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT DT.28.3.2016. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL W I T H THE CIT(APPEALS). WHEREAS T HE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ISSUED NOTICE OF HEARING AND FIX ED THE CASE ON 7.9.2013 AND 19.9.2013 AND SINCE THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE ON 19.9. 2013 ANOTHER LAST OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 28.9.2013 WHEREAS THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER 3 ITA NO. 3397 /BANG/2018 REQUESTING FOR ADJOURNMENT DUE TO PRESSURE OF TAX AUDIT WORK AND S INCE THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE BY THE ASS ESSEE /LD. AR ON THE DATE OF HEARING, THE CIT(APPEALS) DECIDED THAT THE APPEAL EXPART E ON MERITS AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. AGGRIEVED BY THE CIT (APPEALS) ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND P ERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES CONTENTION THAT AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED AS THE LAST DATE OF FILI NG THE T AX AUDIT R ETURNS UNDER SECTION 139(1) OF THE ACT ON 30.09.2018 A N D T HE ASSESSEE'S A.R. WAS BUSY IN FILING THE RETURNS. WE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS EXPARTE WHERE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS APPLIED THE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT AND FURTHER WE ARE NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE ASSESSEE CHOOSES NOT TO APPEAR BEFORE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES . B UT CONSIDERING THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE FOR VARIOUS REASONS COULD NOT HAVE APPEARED AND R EVENUE SHALL NOT BE AT A LOSS IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBJECT TO PAYMENT COST OF RS.5,000 TO THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER AND S UBMIT PROOF OF PAYMENT. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE 4 ITA NO. 3397 /BANG/2018 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER THE ASSESSEE SHALL CO - OPERATE IN SUBMITTING THE DETAILS AND INFORMATION EXPEDITIOUSLY. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CI T(APPEALS) AND RESTORE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUE S TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADJUDICATE AFRESH AND PASS THE ORDER AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF ASSESSEE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 0 T H JULY, 2019. S D / - S D / - ( JASON P BOAZ ) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 0 .07. 2019. *REDDY GP COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE