SURENDER KUMAR SANGHI,JAIPUR V. ITO 3(5), JAIPUR

ITA 1220/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Surender Kumar Sanghi, the appellant, who contested an assessment order for the year 2011-12, which was upheld by the CIT(A). The original assessment by the Assessing Officer assessed the appellant's total income at Rs. 13,64,330, applying Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the sale of immovable property. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating the appellant failed to furnish necessary documents. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant had indeed uploaded documents on the Income Tax Portal, which was not acknowledged by the CIT(A). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469916 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: C.L YADAV
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 250; 50C

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 1220/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.ko\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2011-12 Surender Kumar Sanghi 206 IInd Floor Crown Square Vaishali Nagar, Gandhi Path, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:AMOPS6545E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri C.L Yadav, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 26/03/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . On 29.07.2024, Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhipassed order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), and thereby dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, relating to the assessment year 2011-12, and thereby upheld the assessment order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer. 2 ITA No. 1220/JPR/2024 Surender Kumar Sanghi vs. ITO 2. Vide abovesaid assessment order, the Assessing Officer assessed total income of the assessee at Rs. 13,64,330/-, by applying provisions of Section 50C of the Act, and calculating short term capital gain of the equal amount, having regard to sale of immovable property by the assessee. 3. When the assessment order was challenged before Learned CIT(A), said appeal came to be dismissed, while observing that the assessee had failed to furnish any information or documents. 4. Argument heard. File perused. CONTENTIONS 5. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that the above said observations made by Learned CIT(A) that the assessee did not furnish any information or documents is against record. In this regard, Ld. AR for the assessee-appellant has referred to page 9 of the paper book, and pointed out that on 20.05.2024, the assessee uploaded 5 documents, on the portal of Income Tax Department. 6. Ld. DR for the department, when confronted with the above said information uploaded on the Income Tax Portal, has not disputed the said submission made by Ld. AR for the assessee-appellant. The information and documents were so uploaded in response to the notice dated 13.05.2024 issued by Learned CIT(A), NFAC. 3 ITA No. 1220/JPR/2024 Surender Kumar Sanghi vs. ITO 7. When it stands established that 5 documents were uploaded on behalf of the appellant, on the portal of the department, we find merit in the submission of Ld. AR for the assessee that the observation made in para 5.7 of the impugned order, passed by Learned CIT(A) is against record. 8. In the given situation, we have no option, but to set aside the impugned order, and restore the appeal to the files of Learned CIT(A) for decision afresh, in accordance with law. Result 9. In view of the above findings, this appeal is disposed of for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the assessee before Learned CIT(A), NFAC is restored to its original number for decision afresh, in accordance with law, of course, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/03/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27/03/2025 4 ITA No. 1220/JPR/2024 Surender Kumar Sanghi vs. ITO *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Surender Kumar Sanghi, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1220/JPR/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;diathdkj@Asstt. Registrar "