JITENDRA AMRITA RAUNDAL,KALWAN, NASHIK V. ITO, WARD 2(5), NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 728/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Jitendra Amrita Raundal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, which sustained the addition of Rs.1,94,65,174 as long-term capital gain for the assessment year 2011-12. The addition was based on the difference between the sale consideration of an immovable property and its government valuation, invoking section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had initially assessed the income under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act, following which the assessee appealed. The Ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer but proceeded to pass an order without receiving the report, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778172 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RICHA GULATI VIRTUALLY
• Assessee Lawyers: DHEERAJ DANDGAVAL
• Keywords: Capital asset; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital Gains
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 50C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.728/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2011-12 Jitendra Amrita Raundal 642, Ganesh Nagar, Kalwan, Maharashtra – 423501 Vs. ITO, Ward 2(5), Nashik PAN: ARXPR6830K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Dheeraj Dandgaval Department by : Ms. Richa Gulati (virtually) Date of hearing : 09-10-2025 Date of pronouncement : 09-10-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.02.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on the basis of information available on record that the assessee has sold immovable property bearing survey No.65/1, admeasuring 2H 14R at Haveli, Dist. Pune for a consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- as against the government valuation at Rs.4,71,00,000/- for which provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) are applicable and long term capital gain of Rs.1,94,65,174/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, therefore, the Assessing Officer after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.728/PUN/2025 was issued and served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act determining the income of the assessee at Rs.1,94,65,174/- being the long term capital gain. 3. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee made various submissions. Based on the submissions of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer on 10.01.2024. However, since no remand report from the Assessing Officer was received, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC passed the order on 23.02.2024 sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer by recording as under: Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.728/PUN/2025 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. On the facts and in law, the H'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the order of AO regarding the addition on account of Long term capital Gain of Rs.1,94,65,174/-. 2. On the facts and in law, the H'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in not considering the valuation of the property as valued by their Department Valuation Officer [DVO] and compute capital gains accordingly? 3. On the facts and in law, the H'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in rejecting the report submitted by the DVO, when it was the H'ble CIT(A) himself who had referred the matter to the DVO. 4. On the facts and in law, the H'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering the indexation of Cost for Long Term Capital Asset. 5. The appellant craves liberty to add, alter or amend any ground/ grounds of appeal. 5. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We find the assessment order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the IT Act, 1961. We find on the basis of various submissions made by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. However, no such report was given by the Assessing Officer. We find paras 7 and 7.1 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC read as under: “7. REMAND REPORT 7.1 During the course of appellate proceeding, remand report was called from the concerned AO on 10.01.2024 but was not received till date.” 6. We find instead of waiting for the remand report or giving another reminder to the Assessing Officer for submission of the remand report, the Ld. CIT(A) / Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.728/PUN/2025 NFAC passed the order on 23.02.2024. Under these circumstances, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the issue afresh and as per fact and law after considering the remand report from the Assessing Officer and the rejoinder of the assessee to such remand report. Needless to say the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 9th October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 9th October, 2025 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.728/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 09.10.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 09.10.2025 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "