RAVI VASUDEO GOENKA, MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 480/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Ravi Vasudeo Goenka against the order of the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition made under long-term capital gains as per section 50C of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2013-14. The CIT(A) had passed the order ex-parte due to the non-response of the assessee to notices, which the assessee contested, stating that adjournments were sought but not granted. The Tribunal, upon hearing, decided to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123962 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 19-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Set aside
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘D’ BENCH, MUMBAI. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 480/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2014-15) Ravi Vasudeo Goenka Basement, Chandermukhi Nairman Point Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AACPG2667D Vs. DCIT, Circle 3(2)(1) Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Anil Luhia Department by Ms. Mahita Nair Date of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 20.04.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 26.12.2022 passed by the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the addition made in long term capital gains under section 50C of the I.T. Act. 2. At the outset it was noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte on the ground that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by him. The Learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had issued two notices and the assessee sought adjournment on both the occasions. However, the learned CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without granting adjournment. 3. We heard learned DR and perused the record. Since the learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds on merit, we deem it proper to restore all Ravi Vasudeo Goenka 2 the issues contested by the assessee to the file of learned CIT(A) so that he may adjudicate all the issues afresh on merits, after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 20.4.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (B.R. BASAKARAN) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai; Dated : 20/04/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(Judicial) 4. PCIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai