KAILAS CHIMANBHAI POKAL,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-3(3)(10)), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1220/AHD/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Kailas Chimanbhai Pokal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the addition of Rs. 5,702,390 as Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) exemption under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) had observed that the transactions were not genuine and were arranged to buy entries of LTCG on the sale of shares. The assessee contested that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by confirming the addition and ignoring relevant evidence provided during the assessment. The tribunal noted procedural lapses by the CIT(A), including ignoring the assessee's adjournment request, leading to an ex-parte order, and thus decided to restore the matter for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25496 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: WAGHE PRASAD RAO; S.R.
• Assessee Lawyers: RACHHNA KHANDHAR

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1220/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Kailas Chimanbhai Pokal, 8, Satatya Green Bunglow, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380059 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), (Previously Ward-3(3)(10)) Ahmedabad [PAN No.ACYPP7107P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Rachhna Khandhar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, S.R.-DR Date of Hearing 15.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 15.10.2024 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 10.04.2024 passed for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. The CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 5702390/- being LTCG exemption u/s 10(38) of IT Act, 1961. 2. The CIT(A) further erred both in law and on facts in observing that the transactions are not genuine transactions but are arranged with a view to buying entries of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares, date of purchase and rate of purchase were arranged afterwards. ITA No. 1220/Ahd/2024 Kailash Chimanbhai Pokal vs. ITO Asst.Year –2012-13 - 2– 3. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming various observations in the assessment order which are irrelevant and untenable when appellant had cooperated with AO by furnishing all the evidences and answers on facts which ought to be considered which AO has filed to considered. 4. The CIT(A) which erred in passing the order by way of withdrawing the appeal eventhough the appellant had made an application for restoration of appeal.” 3. On going through the records we find that the assessee has withdrawn the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) vide letter dated 23.12.2019 and also sought restoration of appeal vide letter dated 25.02.2021. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) passed order on 10.04.2024 after sending letter to the assessee on 09.01.2024 for submitting the reply on the same date i.e. 19.01.2024. The assessee sought adjournment on 19.01.2024 which has been ignored by the Ld. CIT(A) which led to passing of an ex-parte order. 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A). 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. In response, the Ld. D.R. placed reliance on the observations made by Ld. CIT(A) in the order passed by him. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. ITA No. 1220/Ahd/2024 Kailash Chimanbhai Pokal vs. ITO Asst.Year –2012-13 - 3– 9. Both the parties fairly prayed that the matter may restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 15/10/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 15/10/2024 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 15.10.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 15.10.2024 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S 15.10.2024 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .10.2024 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 16.10.2024 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 16.10.2024 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "