VEENA DEVI ,PALIGANJ V. CIT(APPEALS), PATNA

ITA 540/PAT/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Veena Devi against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the AO's decision treating the entire sale receipts from immovable property as income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had completed the assessment under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act, due to non-compliance by the assessee in responding to notices regarding the sale of property worth Rs. 1,08,07,000. The ITAT considered the assessee's request for another opportunity to present her case and decided to remit the issue back to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for the assessee to provide substantial documentary evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835516 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANAB ADAK
• Assessee Lawyers: BHAGWAN JHA; ITP
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 540/PAT/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Veena Devi, 13 W/O Nand Kishor Singh, Helha, Nagla, Kinjar, Paliganj, Bihar - 804423 [PAN: CEAPD1338C] Vs. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Sh. Bhagwan Jha, ITP Revenue by : Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT Date of hearing : 03.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.02.2026 O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 26.09.2025, DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081202404(1) challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) passed u/s 250 of the Act. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per information available with the insight portal of the income tax department, the Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 540/PAT/2025 Veena Devi assessee has sold immovable property to the tune of Rs. 1,08,07,000/- and has not filed return of income. Accordingly, after following the due procedure for issuing the notice to the assessee u/s 148 of the Act, the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued in response to the notice the assessee did not file any return of income. Subsequently, the case was fixed for hearing on different dates and allowed time to the assessee to submit his reply but all the notices were remained non complied therefore, the entire sale receipts of Rs. 10,87,000/- against the sale of immovable property was treated as income u/s 69A of the Act and the AO completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 03.05.2024. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) also provided various opportunities to the assessee to rebut the addition made by the AO against the sale of immovable property and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved from the above order, assessee filed appeal before the ITAT. 6. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee is a housewife and she does know the income tax proceedings. Therefore, the notices were remained unresponded and the intention of the assessee was not to disrespect the notices issued by the Ld. revenue authorities. The Ld. Counsel further submitted and undertook that if one more chance is given to the assessee , the assessee will furnish documentary evidences to substantiate her case. 7. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of lower authorities and submitted that both the authorities below provided various opportunities to the assessee and objected for giving one more chance to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 540/PAT/2025 Veena Devi 8. Considering the rival submissions and perusing the entire material on record and orders of authorities below. We noted that the case of the assessee was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and as per the information available towards sale of immovable property of Rs. 1,08,07,000/- has been considered as income u/s 69A of the Act without allowing any expenditures towards the purchase of property for want of proper explanation from the assessee side. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel requested and undertook that the assessee had sufficient documents to rebut the observation made by the AO and has requested for one more chance, therefore, as per our considered opinion, the considering the facts of the case in the interest of justice, we are remitting this issue back to the file of AO for denovo consideration and decide the issue as per law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate her case with cogent documents in support of her claim and not seek unnecessary adjournments for early disposal of the case. In case of failure, no second leniency shall be granted to the assessee. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09.02.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (George Mathan) (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 09.02.2026 AK, Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 540/PAT/2025 Veena Devi Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "