VIJAYBHAI MAGANLAL DESAI,VADODARA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9, VAPI, VAPI

ITA 130/SRT/2026

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai against the order of the CIT(A), which dismissed his appeal concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention revolves around the dismissal of the appeal based on the assessee's opting for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, without having made the requisite payment as determined by Form-3 under the Act. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the non-payment clause in the Act, which should have led to the revival of the appeal and connected proceedings. Additionally, the assessee contested various additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer, including long-term capital gains and deductions under section 80C, which were upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a remand due to the non-consideration of additional evidences and the valuation report by the CIT(A).

• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Surat
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2026
• Laws Referred To: Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY UKE
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDIK VORA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Fair market value; Salary income; Cost of acquisition; Tax effect; Principle of natural justice; Valuation report; Earning of tax free income
• Section: 147; 148; 80C; 10(10D)

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Hon’ble Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai, B-402, Shree Radheshyam Edifice, B/h Nilamber Bunglow No. 1, Alkapuri S.O. Vadodara-390007 PAN: ABIPD1576D (Appellant) Vs The ITO, Ward-9, Vapi (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Hardik Vora, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 24-03-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-03-2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 24-12-2025 passed by Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Gurugram for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal merely on the ground that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, without appreciating that the assessee had not made payment of the amount determined as payable pursuant to Form-3 issued under the said Act. ITA No. 130/Srt/2026 Assessment Year 2012-13 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 130/Srt/2026 Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai, A.Y. 2012-13 2 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in overlooking the explicit condition mentioned in Form-3 issued under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, which clearly provides that in the event of non-payment of the amount payable within the prescribed time, the declaration filed in Form-1 shall be treated as void and shall be deemed never to have been made, resulting in automatic revival of the appeal and connected proceedings. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in ignoring the mandatory provisions of section 4(6) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, which unequivocally stipulate that where the declarant violates any of the conditions of the Act, the declaration shall be presumed never to have been made and all proceedings and claims withdrawn under section 4, along with all consequential proceedings under the Income-tax Act, shall stand revived, thereby rendering the dismissal of the appeal legally unsustainable. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal without discussing the grounds on merits. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing order without providing an opportunity of hearing through virtual conferencing mode even when the same was specifically requested by assessee. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming initiation of re- assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition on account of Long-term Capital Gain of Rs.. 19,25,001/- without providing deduction of cost of acquisition. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition on account of Long-term Capital Gain of Rs. 19,25,001/- without considering the valuation report of fair market value as on 01.04.1981. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition on Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 130/Srt/2026 Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai, A.Y. 2012-13 3 account of Long-term Capital Gain of Rs. 19,25,001/- without considering alternative submission that Assessing Officer should have allowed cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 by considering the valuations of nearby properties. 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming disallowance deductions claimed u/s 80C of the Act amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- without considering that assessee has furnished LIC premium receipts and National Saving Certificates as additional evidences. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of exempt income declared in the return of income amounting 2,91,587/- without considering that the same is maturity proceeds received from Life Insurance Corporation of India which is exempt u/s 10(10D) of the Act and that assessee has duly furnished LIC policy status report as additional evidences. 13. It is prayed that the addition/disallowance may kindly be deleted, considering the facts and evidence on record. 14. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal. Total tax effect Rs. 5,30,460/-” 3. During the year under consideration, assessee has not filed Return of Income u/s 139(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2012-13. The case was reopened on the basis of information available with the department that the assessee has sold an immovable property during A.Y. 2012-13. In response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act, Assessee has filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 5,24,430/-. Assessee has shown salary income, income from other sources and long term capital gain of Rs. 99,999/- and claimed exempt income u/s. 10(10D) of Rs. 2,91,587/- and deduction u/s. 80C of Rs.1,00,000/-. The Assessing officer made addition of Rs. 19,25,001/- as difference in assessee’s share of sale value consideration and capital gain calculated, disallowed claim of Rs.1,00,000/- u/s. 80C and exempt income Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 130/Srt/2026 Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai, A.Y. 2012-13 4 of Rs. 2,91,587/-. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs. 99,999/-. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing, the ld. A.R. submitted that certain additional evidence were filed and the same was not considered by the CIT(A). Therefore, the ld. A.R. requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A). 6. The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that since the valuation report along with additional evidences were not considered by the CIT(A), it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper verification and adjudication of the issues contested by the assessee. The assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27-03-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 27/03/2026 a.k. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 130/Srt/2026 Vijaybhai Maganlal Desai, A.Y. 2012-13 5 आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard file. By order, Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Printed from counselvise.com "