NINEESHA DAS,HOOGHLY V. ITO, WARD 23(1), , HOOGHLY

ITA 794/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Nineesha Das against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2020-2021. The primary issue was the difference between the actual consideration paid for a property and its stamp value, which the AO treated as unexplained income under 'income from other sources' as per Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act. The AO did not obtain a valuation from the District Valuation Officer (DVO) and adopted 25% of the differential amount as taxable income. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the AO's approach and restored the matter for re-assessment, imposing a condition of cost on the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708872 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs. ITAT No.221 of 2013
• Laws Referred To: Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAMPA RAY
• Assessee Lawyers: S.P.DUTTA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.794/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-2021) Nineesha Das, 0, Mother Land Nursing Home, Dankuni Library Para, Hooghly Vs ITO, Ward-23(1), Hooghly PAN No. : BVHPD 8303 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.P.Dutta, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Pampa Ray, JCIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 18.06.2024 for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. 2. Shri S.P.Dutta, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Pampa Ray, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 228 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating sufficient reasons which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld.Sr.DR also did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, the delay of 228 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. It was the submission by the ld. AR that the assessee has purchased a commercial property for a consideration of Rs.59,94,000/-. It was the submission that as per the Sub-Registrar Valuation the stamp value of the property was Rs.1,39,86,000/-. It was the submission that the AO adopted ITA No.794/KOL/2025 2 the difference as unexplained difference of the assessee and treated 25% of the total value as liable to be taxed under the head ‘income from other sources.’ It was the submission that the AO has not got valuation of the property by the DVO. It was the submission that the assessee has paid Rs.79,92,000/-, therefore, no further addition is called for in the hands of the assessee. 5. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently relied on the order of the ld.AO and ld. CIT(A). 6. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the show cause notice issued to the assessee as to why 25% of the differential amount of Rs.59,94,000/- being the different between the Sub-Registration Value and the actual consideration paid by the assessee, should not be treated as income of the assessee under the income from other sources u/s.56(2)(x) of the Act. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the order is an ex-parte order. Prima facie, it is noticed from the present facts of the case that the AO has not shown as to why he had adopted 25% as the income that is liable to be assessed under the head income from other sources. Here 25% is on account of the assessee’s 1/4th share in the property. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal, passed in GA NO.3686 of 2013 ITAT No.221 of 2013, dated 13.03.2024 has held that it is incumbent upon the AO to intimate the assessee as to whether he proposes have the property valued by the DVO as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act. It is also noticed that the assessee has not appeared before the AO, ITA No.794/KOL/2025 3 thus, it cannot be said that the AO had not given any opportunity to question the assessee in regard to the proposal to invoke the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act. In view of these circumstances and looking to the conduct of the assessee for non-appearance before either of the authorities below, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twentyfive Thousand only) by the assessee to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor of the Centenary Building, High Court, Calcutta-700001, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the ld. AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld.CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the AO in the readjudication proceedings, positively 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 15/07/2025. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 15/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. ITA No.794/KOL/2025 4 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// "