SUMAN DEVI,JAMSHEDPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD3(1) JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

ITA 185/RAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Suman Devi against the order of the CIT(A), which pertained to the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention in the appeal was the dismissal of the assessee's ground concerning the purchase cost of a flat, which was acquired at a price lower than the guideline value. The CIT(A) had invoked Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, leading to a decision unfavorable to the assessee, primarily because the issue was not challenged before the Assessing Officer initially. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances under which the assessee was unrepresented, decided to restore this issue along with another related issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716524 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Section 56(2)(x) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 185/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Suman Devi, H. No. 34, Gurudwara Road, Road No. 1, Jamco, Azad Basti, Telco, Jamshedpur-831004. PAN No. AVRPD 3617 Q Vs. I.T.O., Ward-3(1), Jamshedpur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Sri A.K. Jajodia, C.A. Department represented by Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr. DR Date of hearing 18/08/2025 Date of pronouncement 18/08/2025 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A), NFAC in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10270955 dated 07/03/2025 for the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. Shri A.K. Jajodia, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Khub Chand Pandya, ld. Sr.DR is represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the only issue in the assessee's appeal was against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the assessee's ground in respect of the purchase cost of a flat at a price lower than the guideline value. It was a submission that on other grounds, the ld. CIT(A) had restored the issue to the file of Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee had not been able to produce all the evidences before the Assessing Officer. It was a submission that in regard to the issue of the said valuation of the flat, the ld. CIT(A) had invoked Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 185/Ran/2025 Suman Devi Vs ITO 2 the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act and had held the issue against the assessee as the assessee had not challenged the issue before the Assessing Officer. It was a submission that this issue may also be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in the interest of justice. 4. In reply, the ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee had stood unrepresented before the Assessing Officer. Admittedly, this is the reason why the ld. CIT(A) had restored the issue in respect of the addition under Section 69 before the Assessing Officer. The second issue in the assessment order is the addition representing the difference between the purchase price of the flat directly from the builder at a value lower than the government value as per the stamp duty. As admittedly, the assessee stood unrepresented before the Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that this issue must also be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication. The Assessing Officer shall issue fresh notices to the assessee and readjudicate the issue afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 18th August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 18/08/2025 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 185/Ran/2025 Suman Devi Vs ITO 3 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi Printed from counselvise.com "