Case Law Details
Mangalagiri Tulasi Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Introduction: The case of Mangalagiri Tulasi Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) revolves around the dispute regarding the taxation of long-term capital gains (LTCG) arising from the sale of a property. Despite the Civil Court canceling the sale of the property, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) directed re-examination of the matter.
Detailed Analysis: The appellant raised concerns over the assessment completed under section 144 read with section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as well as the taxability of Rs. 1,01,39,166/- as LTCG from the sale of land for the Assessment Year 2012-13. However, the appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] without addressing the merits due to non-compliance with notices.
The appellant argued that they hadn’t received the notices issued by the CIT(A), suggesting they might have been lost in the spam folder. Additionally, they highlighted that the assessment was conducted under section 148 read with section 144, and they were unaware of the notices issued under section 148. On the merits, they contended that the sale of the property, which led to LTCG liability, was annulled by a Civil Court.
While the Departmental Representative (DR) supported the orders of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A), the ITAT deemed it necessary to give the appellant an opportunity to prove that the property in question was not sold or that the sale was canceled by the Civil Court. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the AO for re-examination, with instructions for the appellant to cooperate with the Revenue.
Conclusion: The decision of the ITAT Bangalore in the case of Mangalagiri Tulasi Vs ITO highlights the importance of providing opportunities for fair adjudication, even in cases where procedural issues arise. By directing the re-examination of the LTCG dispute concerning a property whose sale was canceled by a Civil Court, the ITAT ensures that justice and equity prevail in taxation matters. This decision underscores the significance of due process and thorough examination of factual and legal aspects before reaching a conclusion.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 03.10.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2012-13.
2. Assessee has raised 15 grounds. The grounds raised by the assessee relates to the legal issue to validate assessment completed under section 144 r.w.s. 148 of the Act as well as on merits as regards taxability of a sum of Rs. 1,01,39,166/- as long-term capital gains from sale of a land.
3. At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits since several notices issued from the Office of the CIT(A) was not complied with by the assessee. The learned AR submitted that assessee was never in receipt of notices issued from the Office of the CIT(A) as the same may have settled in the spam folder of the assessee’s email ID. Further, the learned AR submitted that assessment was completed under section 148 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and assessee was never in receipt of the notices issued under section 148 of the Act. On merits, the learned AR submitted that the sale of property on which assessee has been made liable for long-term capital gains has been cancelled by a Civil Court.
4. Learned DR supported the orders of the AO and the CIT(A).
5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee submits that assessee cannot be made liable for capital gains since sale of the impugned property has been cancelled by the Civil Court. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee should be given an opportunity to prove her case that the property in question for which she is made liable for long-term capital gains has not been sold / sale has been cancelled by the Civil Court. For examining the said issue, the matter is restored to AO. Assessee shall co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment in the matter. It is ordered accordingly.
6. Since we have restored the matter on merits to the files of the AO, the grounds relating to the legal issue are left open and not adjudicated.
7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
Author Bio
