Khushbu Ramchandra Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Director Not Seller, Delay Deserves Mercy: ITAT Mumbai Restores Ex-parte Reassessment to CIT(A)
ITAT Mumbai set aside ex-parte reassessment & appellate orders where capital gains of ₹80 lakh on sale of flat were taxed in hands of an individual Director instead of the company. Tribunal noted that the assessee was merely a Director & authorised signatory of Implicit Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd, which had actually sold the property, disclosed the transaction in its return & paid due taxes.
Assessment was framed ex-parte u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B, & CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on limitation, ignoring affidavit explaining 101-day delay & without examining merits. Holding that reasonable opportunity was denied at both stages & factual matrix remained unexamined, ITAT restored the matter to CIT(A) with a direction to consider condonation of delay liberally, examine all evidences & pass a speaking order on merits after granting proper hearing. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter, ‘Ld.CIT(A)] passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year 2015-16, date of order 19/08/2025. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 147 read with section 144 read with section 144B of the Act, date of order 12/01/2024.
