TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Capital Gains Tax Appeal Restored: Faceless Hearing Challenges Highlight Procedural Nuances in Income Tax Assessment</h1> <h3>Sh. Aroon Kumar Sinha Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1), Dehradun</h3> Sh. Aroon Kumar Sinha Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1), Dehradun - TMI The Appellate Tribunal (ITAT Dehradun) heard an appeal for AY 2015-16 against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee did not appear, and the case proceeded ex-parte. The dispute centered on the computation of long-term capital gains at Rs. 53,32,900/- based on sale consideration of Rs. 60.50 lakhs, and the rejection of the assessee's claim for deduction under sections 54 and 54F due to non-filing of a revised return, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Goetze India Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC).The Revenue supported the disallowance, while the Assessing Officer had framed a best assessment under section 144 rejecting the section 54F claim. The CIT(A)/NFAC upheld this, citing lack of cogent evidence from the assessee.The Tribunal observed that Goetze India Ltd. does not bar appellate authorities from entertaining new claims even without a revised return. Noting possible communication gaps in the faceless hearing system, the Tribunal deemed it 'appropriate in the larger interest of justice' to restore the appeal to the Assessing Officer for 'afresh appropriate adjudication,' allowing three effective hearings at the assessee's risk.The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced on 23rd April, 2025.
TaxTMI 