VINAYAK JAGANNATH RAGIT,NAGPUR V. ITO WARD 3(1), NAGPUR

ITA 434/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vinayak Jagannath Ragit against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was passed ex-parte. The appeal contested the addition of capital gains from the sale of immovable property under section 50C of the Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs.35,58,500. The assessee argued that the notice under section 148 was invalid, and the computation of capital gains did not consider the cost of acquisition and indexation, nor did it account for the assessee's 1/8th share as a co-owner of the property. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered these issues and thus remitted the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24318 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY Y. MARATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHAY AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital Gains; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 50C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.434/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2016–17) Vinayak Jagannath Ragit Plot no.18, Navnit Nagar, Wadi 440 0203 PAN – AGUPR4599K ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–3(1), Nagpur ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Abhay Agrawal Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 18/11/2024 Date of Order – 28/11/2024 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The aforesaid appeal by the assessee against the impugned order dated 29/05/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2016–17. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that, the notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law. 2 Vinayak Jagannath Ragit 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of learned AO in making an addition on account of capital gains arising from sale of immovable property under section 50C at Rs.35,58,500. 4. The learned AO erred in not providing the benefit of deduction towards cost of acquisition and indexation thereon while computing the long-term capital gain. 5. The learned AO erred in computing the capital gains by in hands of assessee whereas there were 8 co-owners of the property and 1/8th share belonged to the assessee. 6. The Appellant prays leave of the Hon'ble Tribunal to add, amend, alter any of the Grounds of Appeal.” 3. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned A.R. appearing for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A). 2. On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assesse, however, the assessee did not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A). 2. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, We are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his case before the 3 Vinayak Jagannath Ragit learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/11/2024 Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 28/11/2024 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "