SEETA RAM SINGH,VILLAGE KASTALA KASAMABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD THREE(FIVE),HAPUR

ITA 1840/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Seeta Ram Singh against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2011-12. The primary issues in the appeal included the rejection of additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the unjustified addition of Rs. 220,456 as Long Term Capital Gain on the sale of agricultural land, which was allegedly treated as a sale of an immovable asset. Additionally, the assessee contested the addition of Rs. 400,000 as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's representation in multiple hearings and proceeded with the assistance of the Ld. DR. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the additional evidences provided by the assessee and thus decided to remit the matter back to the AO for a de novo assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 43527 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B.S. ANAND
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital Gains
• Section: 148; 250; 56; 69A

Judgement Text

"I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1840/Del/2024 िनधा\tरणवष\t/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Seeta Ram Singh, Village Kastala Kasamabad, Hapur, Gautam Budh Nagar, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. बनाम Vs. ITO Ward-3(5), Madhuban Colony, Meerut Road, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. PAN No.DARPS3997A अपीलाथ\u0012 Appellant \u0014\u0015यथ\u0012/Respondent िनधा\u0007\bरतीक\rओरसे /Assessee by None राज\u0012वक\rओरसे /Revenue by Shri B.S. Anand, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\rतारीख/ Date of hearing: 03.03.2025 उ\u0018ोषणाक\rतारीख/Pronouncement on 19.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 12/02/2024 for the AY 2011-12. The assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the CIT has erred in making an order u/s 250 as erroneous, arbitrary and bad in law and on facts. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) erred on I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 2 facts and in law in not allowing the appellant application filed under Rule 46A of The Income Tax Act, 1961 for admission of additional evidences and further erred in not considering the evidences filed before him before adjudicating the appeal of the appellant. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition of Rs.220456 made on account of Long Term Capital Gain was unjustified, since the land was agriculture land backed by Khasra khatauni in the favour of assessee and sold by assessee as agriculture land without changing its land use. The said sale was exempted sale however the same was treated as sale of immovable asset. Further since the nature of land under consideration is agriculture land it does not qualify for application of Section 50C. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case No action has been taken to ascertain the nature of land as agricultural, which was ignored by the concerned AO as well as the Ld.CIT(A). 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT was not justified in assessing the income of* Rs 400000 u/s 69A as unexplained ignoring the fact that the sale deed to the person never happened however two other sale deeds were there for same amount. Thus the sale deed found now be taken into consideration. Further, the assessee was forced under pressure to surrender the amount of Rs. 400000 as unexplained income. The said sum was not surrender in fact accommodating in nature. Moreover, when there is no transaction of Rs. 400000 then how can it be added to 69A. 6. That on-the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in not appreciating that addition cannot be sustained merely on the basis of a so called revised computation, submitted if any by counsel cannot be legitimately be consider and so there must be some cogent material to corroborate the surrender. I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 3 7. That on the facts of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in holding that no pressure or undue influence acted upon the appellant to surrender Rs.400000/- as there was a pressure to add the total sum as unexplained income. 8. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or modify any of the grounds or raise any further ground during the course of hearing of the appeal.” 2. At the time of hearing, we noticed that assessee has filed the present appeal on 24/04/2024 and the appeal was came up for hearing on 22/07/2024, 14/10/2024, 13/01/2024 and on present day, in none of the occasions no representation on behalf of the assessee. We proceeded to hear the case with the assistant of Ld. DR. The Ld. DR brought to my notice that the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of AIR Information as per which assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.57,87,500/- in his bank account. In response to notice u/s 148 Ld. AR of the assessee attended and filed return of income declaring income of Rs.87,770/- and agricultural income ofRs.30,000/- and prayed that the same may be treated as return of income failed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. As per the record submitted before the Assessing Officer, it was noticed that the assessee along with his wife had sold an immovable properties during the FY 2010-11 for Rs.53.99 lacs and I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 4 out of the sale proceeds and subsequent withdrawal, the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs.57,87,500/- in his saving bank account. He has filed the relevant supporting documents. From the perusal of record, the Assessing Officer observed that assessee has received Rs.4 lakhs from Mr. Jafarruddin on 10/06/2010 but he has not furnished any supporting evidence. Since no supporting evidences were brought on record by the assessee he proceeded to make the addition of Rs.4 lakhs as an unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Further Assessing Officer observed that assessee had sold the property measuring 2157.57 sq. mts for Rs.49.99 lakhs and the circle rate of the same is 56.90 lacs which was purchased by him jointly with his wife. Accordingly he invoked the provisions of section 56 of the Act and accordingly he computed the capital gains based on the information available on record and determined the undisclosed capital gain of Rs.2,20,456/-. Accordingly he made the addition to this income. 3. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and filed a detailed written submissions along with additional evidences which is reproduced at page 3 to 7 of the appellate order. Ld. CIT(A) observed that assessee has not filed any supporting documents with regard to addition u/s 69A of the Act I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 5 and further he observed that the assessee has taken a plea that the relevant land was agricultural land and the same was not eligible to determine the long term capital gain. The assessee also filed google map to show the distance of the property from the municipal limits and the population of the city in the year 2011-12. He further observed that from the record no such claim was made by the assessee as agricultural land before the AO and it was not filed before the AO. With the above observations he rejected the claim of the assessee and dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee. 4. Before us the assessee has raised a specific ground that the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income tax Rules and rejected the same merely on the basis that it was not filed before the AO. After considering the facts on record the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the additional evidences submitted by the assessee and to meet the ends of justice, we are inclined to remit the issue under consideration to the file of AO to consider the evidences filed by the assessee as additional evidences and verify the same denovo and redo the assessment denovo after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I.T.A.No.1840/Del/2024 6 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 19/03/2025 Sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 19.03.2025 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi "