NITABEN CHANDULAL PATEL ,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1763/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Nitaben Chandulal Patel against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 24,00,510 as Long-Term Capital Gain (LTCG) under section 50C of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The primary contention was regarding the classification of the land in question, which the assessee argued was rural agricultural land, and thus not subject to the provisions of section 50C. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to the assessee's repeated adjournment requests and failure to provide necessary details. The Tribunal, considering the repeated opportunities given to the assessee and the procedural aspects, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787155 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 22-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROHIT AA SUDA NI
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDIK VORA
• Keywords: Set aside; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 147; 50C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1763/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Nitaben Chandulal Patel A-6, Chhaya Flats, Nr. Khawadwala Society, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad-380061. [PAN: AFCPP1692N] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Hardik Vora, AR Respondent by: Shri Rohit Aasudani, Sr. D R. Date of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 18.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A), Ahmedabad, relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.24,00,510/- as 1/8th share of the Jantri Value u/s 50C under the head LTCG. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 24,00,510/- as LTCG u/s 50C of the Act without considering that the land under question is a rural agricultural land. Printed from counselvise.com 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing order without considering the adjournment request filed by the assessee. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing ex-parte order without considering that assessee was awaiting certificate from local authority certifying the distance of land in question from the village. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 6. Alternatively, on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not providing benefit of cost of acquisition for calculating LTCG. 7. It is prayed that the addition made by the Assessing Officer may kindly be deleted considering the facts and evidence on record. 8. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded twelve opportunities of hearing to furnish details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate its claim regarding alleged undisclosed Long-Term Capital Gain. However, despite being granted multiple opportunities, the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments and failed to furnish the requisite details or explanations before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliance will be made, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished to the Revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Ld.CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. Printed from counselvise.com 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 17.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 17.11.2025 MV 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, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "