VIJENDRA KUMAR,PATNA V. ITO, WARD- 6(1), PATNA

ITA 167/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vijendra Kumar, the appellant, who entered into a land development agreement with M/s. Sri Ravi Homes Pvt. Limited during the financial year 2015-16, relevant to the assessment year 2016-17. This agreement involved the transfer of land ownership rights in exchange for a portion of the constructed property, which led to capital gains tax implications. The Assessing Officer reopened the case, issued statutory notices, and added Rs.62,89,418 as capital gain income. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed due to non-submission of required documents. Subsequently, the assessee approached the ITAT, which found procedural lapses in the lower authorities' handling of the case and decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711338 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 167/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vijendra Kumar 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 167/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Vijendra Kumar,………………….………………Appellant Nayatola, Kumharar, Near Kirti Petrol Pump, Patna-800026, Bihar [PAN:BRWPK0275P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………..……….....Respondent Ward-6(1), Patna Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kumar Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: July 10, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 11.09.2023 passed for Assessment Year 2016-2017. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 167/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vijendra Kumar 2 2. The appeal is time barred by 492 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed a condonation petition dated 9th April, 2025 saying that the concerned Advocate all of a sudden fell ill and not in a position to attend the Tribunal. Due to that, there was an inordinate delay of 492 days in submitting the appeal before the ITAT. The assessee was not aware of any notices of hearing and the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 492 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, we are inclined to condone the delay of 492 days. Hence the delay is condoned. 4. Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee is an individual. The appellant-assessee had entered into a registered land development agreement with M/s. Sri Ravi Homes Pvt. Limited, Patna (The Developer) in the Financial Year 2015-16 relevant to the assessment year 2016-17. The rights of ownership of the land were transferred by the Land Owner against receipt of ownership of a portion of property constructed while the remaining portion of constructed property is apportioned by the builder against the cost of development incurred by the developer and such arrangement attract capital gain and capital gain tax. The case was reopened. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 167/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vijendra Kumar 3 After issuing statutory notice, the assessment was completed by making an addition of Rs.62,89,418/- as capital gain income. 5. Aggrieved by the said order of ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals), wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed when the assessee failed to make any submission before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 6. Being aggrieved and not being satisfied, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. 7. None appeared on behalf of the asessee. The ld. D.R present. 8. Upon hearing the submission of the ld. Counsel of the revenue and on perusal of the order of lower authorities, we find that before the ld. Assessing Officer, there was non-compliance on behalf of the assessee even several notices have been sent to him. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has also held in its order that appellant was asked to submit his explanation in support of his claim, but he did not make any submission till date. 9. Keeping in view the order passed by the lower authorities, considering the facts and for the interest of justice, we are inclined to set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) and restore the appeal of the assessee before the ld. Assessing Officer to decide the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and going over the documents filed by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 167/PAT/2025 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vijendra Kumar 4 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/07/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar) (Pradip Kumar Choubey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Kolkata, the 22nd day of July, 2025 Copies to :(1) Vijendra Kumar, Nayatola, Kumharar, Near Kirti Petrol Pump, Patna-800026, Bihar (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Patna (3) CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi; (3) CIT - ; (4) The Departmental Representative; (5) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com "