Padma Kallu Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Summary: The Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal disposed of two interlinked appeals of Padma Kallu for AY 2018-19 by a consolidated order. The first appeal, ITA No. 208/Hyd/2026, challenged the quantum reassessment, while ITA No. 236/Hyd/2026 challenged the penalty imposed under section 270A. The principal dispute in the quantum appeal concerned the validity of the reassessment initiated through notice under section 148 dated 25.04.2022 and, in particular, whether the Assessing Officer had obtained approval from the authority specified under section 151(ii).
The Assessing Officer had acted on information from the Sub-Registrar, Ranga Reddy District, that the assessee had sold immovable property for Rs.60,00,000/- during the relevant previous year without filing a return for AY 2018-19. The assessee stated that the property had been purchased on 27.08.2012 for Rs.6,64,480/- and sold on 12.03.2018 for Rs.60,00,000/-. She claimed Rs.49,64,515/- as cost of improvement and offered LTCG of Rs.3,71,005/-. The AO rejected the cost-of-improvement claim for want of satisfactory documentary evidence and, after allowing indexed acquisition cost of Rs.9,03,692/-, assessed LTCG at Rs.50,96,308/-.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee sought admission of additional evidence, explaining that she was a housewife and was not conversant with tax law. She also stated that the original property was a vacant plot and that a residential house had subsequently been constructed using loans from various sources. The CIT(A) declined to admit the additional evidence and confirmed the assessment. The assessee also raised additional legal grounds before the Tribunal challenging the jurisdiction assumed under sections 147 and 148, including the approval obtained under section 151.
