Hemant Padmakar Chavan, Nashik V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Nashik, Nashik

ITA 779/PUN/2022

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Hemant Padmakar Chavan against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik, which confirmed the disallowance of expenses claimed by the assessee for vacating tenants from a property. The original assessment by the Assessing Officer added these expenses back to the assessee's income, significantly increasing the declared income for the assessment year 2011-12. The Tribunal found merit in the additional evidence provided by the assessee and decided to remand the case for a detailed examination of these documents to ascertain the genuineness of the claimed expenditures.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137169 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-10-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Condonation of delay; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.779/PUN/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Hemant Padmakar Chavan, Flat No.40, A Wing, Vedas Spaces, Near Manohar Garden Lawns, Govind Nagar, Nashik- 422009. PAN : AASPC0615K Vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Nashik. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [‘the CIT(A)’] dated 09.01.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 09 days in filing the present appeal. The appellant had filed the petition praying for condonation of delay on the ground that the delay had occurred on Assessee by : Shri Sanket M. Joshi Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 19.07.2023 Date of pronouncement : 31.07.2023 ITA No.779/PUN/2022 2 account of poor health as he was suffering from slip disc etc. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR has no serious objection to condone the delay. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for condoning the delay of 09 days. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 09 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving income under the head “Income from other sources”. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2011-12 was filed on 30.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.16,04,561/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nashik (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 21.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at a total income of Rs.2,78,43,145/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition by disallowing the cost of expenses incurred for sale of the property/land situated at Survey No.617A, Plot No.176, Nashik in the form of amounts paid to tenants for vacating the property of Rs.94,41,000/- while computing the capital gains for failure of the assessee to prove the genuineness of the expenditure. ITA No.779/PUN/2022 3 Even on appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the same was confirmed, as the assessee had failed to discharge the onus lying upon him to establish the genuineness of the expenditure. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. Before us, the ld. Counsel filed the additional evidence in support of the expenditure of payment made to the tenants for vacating the property along with application for admission of the said additional evidence. It is also further stated that the evidence is necessary to adjudicate the issue in appeal and the said additional evidence/information could not be filed before the lower authorities on account of factor which are beyond his control. 6. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR has no objection to admit the additional evidence and send it back to the file of the Assessing Officer for the examination of additional evidences and decide the issue of allowability of expenditure incurred on the payments made to the tenants for vacating the property. 7. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We are satisfied that the requirements of Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal), Rules, 1963 were satisfied and, ITA No.779/PUN/2022 4 therefore, we admit the additional evidence and remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide the issue of allowability of expenditure incurred on the payments made to the tenants for vacating the property while computing the capital gains arising on sale of property by considering the additional evidence filed before us. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 31 st day of July, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 31 st July, 2023. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Nashik. 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Nashik. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.