AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 27.11.2025, for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The appeal is time barred by 45 days. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, the delay has been caused for the reasons stated in petition which appears to be bonafide. Thus, delay of 45 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits.
Shri Ashutosh Aggarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that a residential property i.e. DDA plot bearing No. 492, Block Pocket C-2, Sector-34, Rohini, Delhi, measuring 32 sq mts., jointly owned by the assessee and her husband Shri Kuldeep Raj was sold for a total consideration of Rs.14,00,000/-. The sale proceeds were equally received by the assessee and her husband, i.e., Rs.7,00,000/- each. During the course of assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the assessee had fairly stated that the total sale consideration received was Rs.14,00,000/-. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) adopted stamp duty value and made addition of Rs.22,50,000/- in the hands of the assessee, without referring valuation to the DVO. Further, the AO failed to take note of the fact that the residential property sold was jointly owned by the assessee and her husband and the sale consideration was received in equal proportion by joint owners. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144D of the Act, the assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) in ex-parte proceedings dismissed appeal of the assessee. The ld. Counsel submits that the assessee could not respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A) as the email address given in Form No. 35 was of the husband of the assessee, who died on 19.01.2024. He further pointed that all notices issued by the CIT(A) were after the demise of assessee’s husband. The assessee being an old lady of 76 years of age was not aware of the proceedings before the CIT(A). Hence, no submissions could be made by the assessee before the CIT(A).
Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the Department vehemently supporting impugned order prayed for dismissal of the appeal of the assessee.
Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. Considering entire facts of the case, I am of considered view that the documents furnished by the assessee were not examined by the authorities below. Without commenting on merits of the issue, I deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the AO for fresh assessment. The AO shall grant reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee before passing the order, in accordance with law.
The assessee may update her e-mail address on the portal of Income Tax Department for service of notice by the AO. Upon service of notice, the assessee shall respond to the same, without fail.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 20th day of May, 2026.