ARCHANA VIJAY PATIL (L/H of Manikrao Anandrao Deshmukh, Sangli V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Sangli, Sangli

ITA 776/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Archana Vijay Patil, the legal heir of Manikrao Anandrao Deshmukh, who appealed against the order of the NFAC, which had dismissed her appeal for non-prosecution regarding the assessment year 2016-17. The primary issue in the original assessment was the addition of Rs. 25,73,505 under section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the purchase of agricultural land at a price significantly lower than its stamp value. The ITAT found that the NFAC should have addressed the appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it on procedural grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 138163 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 56(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE „SMC‟ BENCHES :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.776/PUN/2023 (A.Y. 2016-17) Archana Vijay Patil L/H of Manikrao Anandrao Deshmukh, Kadegaon, Sangli, Sangli-415304. PAN: BAYPD 4233 M vs ITO, Ward-2(4), Sangli. Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod Shingte, CA Revenue by : Shri A.K. Mahala, DR Date of hearing : 02/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 02/08/2023 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 19.05.2023 for A.Y.2016-17. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that assessee is an individual deriving income from business and other sources, filed e-return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 31/03/2017 declaring total income of Rs.5,99,150/-. Against the said return of income, assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward-2(4), Sangli (for short, „AO‟) vide order dated 21/12/2018 passed u/sec.143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „Act‟) at a total income of Rs.31,72,655/-. While doing so, the AO made an addition of Rs.25,73,505/- u/sec. 56(2)(viib) of the Act in respect of purchase of ITA No.776 /PUN/2023 Archana Vijay Patil 2 agricultural land located at Kasabe Karad, Taluka Karad, Dist. Satara, Survey No.316/1 for a consideration of Rs. 18,01,495/- as against the stamp value of Rs. 43,75,000/-. The difference amount between the two of Rs. 25,73,505/- was brought to tax by the AO u/sec. 56(2) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the above addition, the assessee was filed appeal before the NFAC, who vide impugned order, dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, without going into the merits of the issues in appeal. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5 I had heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record. 6. I had carefully perused the order of NFAC and find that NFAC had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the impugned addition. It is trite law that the appellate authority like NFAC, even in case of ex-parte order, should dispose of the appeal on merits. The order of the NFAC, in the instant appeal, is against the settled position of law, therefore, I remand the matter back to the file ITA No.776 /PUN/2023 Archana Vijay Patil 3 of NFAC with a direction to dispose of the appeal of the assessee on merits after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 02 nd August, 2023. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 02 nd August, 2023 vr/- Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 5. The DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench Pune. 6. Guard File. By Order // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Pune.