Kandavara Abdul Basheer Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) set aside the order of the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of Kandavara Abdul Basheer, a non-resident individual, for AY 2016-17 on the ground of non-prosecution, and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.
The assessee’s appeal before the CIT(A) arose from a reassessment framed under sections 147 read with 144C, involving additions towards unexplained portion of purchase consideration of immovable property, stamp duty and registration charges, and an addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b) for difference between stamp duty value and declared consideration. The CIT(A), despite noting the statement of facts on record, dismissed the appeal merely because the assessee did not appear on multiple occasions.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has no authority to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution and is duty-bound to adjudicate the issues on merits based on material available on record. It was noted that neither the CIT(A) nor the Assessing Officer had properly examined crucial aspects such as the timing and source of payment of ₹7 lakh to the builder, verification of stamp duty payments, or the applicability of section 56(2)(vii)(b), especially when the stamp duty difference was less than 10%.
Considering the assessee’s non-resident status and the lack of proper factual verification, the ITAT restored the entire matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, granting the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate the sources of payments and explain the valuation difference. The appeal was accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
