KULWINDER KAUR,CHANDIGARH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(5), CHANDIGARH

ITA 595/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Kulwinder Kaur, against the order of the Ld. CIT Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Mumbai, which pertained to the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary issue in the appeal was the classification of a gain arising from the compulsory acquisition of immovable property, which the Assessing Officer treated as a Short-Term Capital Gain amounting to Rs.12,67,605. The assessee contended that it should be classified as a Long-Term Capital Gain. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the initial appeal due to non-prosecution, as the assessee failed to comply effectively with statutory notices during the appellate proceedings. The Tribunal, however, noted that the appeal was not decided on merits and thus remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716751 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: LOVESH BANSAL; AJAY JAIN; C.A VIRTUAL MODE
• Keywords: Set aside; Compulsory Acquisition of immovable property

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “SMC”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM ITA No. 595 /Chd/ 2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kulwinder Kaur H.No. 4, Sector 41B, Chandigarh Vs The ITO Ward 5(5) Chandigarh PAN NO: BPTPK3868K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Lovesh Bansal, CA for Shri Ajay Jain, C.A (Virtual Mode) Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. dR Date of Hearing : 19/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 20/08/2025 Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Mumbai dt. 25/02/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In the present appeal the assessee has challenged the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the gain arising on compulsory acquisition of immovable property as Short-Term Capital Gain amounting to Rs.12,67,605/-, whereas according to the assessee the same ought to have been treated as Long-Term Capital Gain. 3. On perusal of the impugned order, it is noticed that though the assessee had filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), no effective compliance was made in response to the statutory notices issued in the appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, proceeded to dismiss the appeal on Printed from counselvise.com 2 the ground of non-prosecution, while also observing that in the absence of any written submissions or evidences filed, the grounds raised by the assessee could not be entertained on merits. 3.1 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the necessary documents and explanations before the lower authorities, and therefore, in the interest of justice, an opportunity may be granted so that the matter may be examined afresh at the end of the Assessing Officer. It was contended that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if the matter is remanded back, whereas irreparable loss would be suffered by the assessee if such an opportunity is denied. 3.2 On the other hand, the Ld. DR opposed the request for remand by submitting that sufficient opportunities had already been afforded during the course of the assessment as well as the appellate proceedings and yet the assessee failed to avail the same. It was accordingly argued that the assessee cannot be permitted to fill in the lacunae at this stage and that the order of the lower authorities deserves to be upheld. 4. We have carefully considered the matter. It is a settled proposition of law that the first appellate authority is duty-bound to dispose of the appeal on merits even in the event of non-appearance or default on the part of the assessee. We noticed that the lower authorities have dismissed the appeal without deciding the appeal on merits. In our considered opinion the authorities below are duty bound to examine the issues in detail before rendering its decision. 5. In the present case, it is evident that the assessee did not avail the opportunities afforded, but at the same time the issues raised have not been adjudicated on merits in the true sense of the term. In the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the Printed from counselvise.com 3 file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law, after granting adequate and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and produce necessary details and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), failing which the appellate authority shall be at liberty to pass an order on the basis of material available on record. 6. In the result, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/08/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AG Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. Guard File By order, Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "