AMIT KUMAR SARAF,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD-3(1), BOKARO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 296/RAN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi03 March 20202 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication, as the lower appellate authority failed to consider relevant documents. All other incidental issues related to the section 54F deduction claim were also to be considered.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2014-15 concerned the nature of capital assets sold. The CIT(A)'s order did not adequately consider the sale deed's details regarding whether it involved a residential house or land.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the nature of capital assets sold, specifically whether it was a residential house property or land, for the purpose of deduction under Section 54F.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, : RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA

For Respondent: Smt. Nisha Singhmarr, JCIT(DR)
Hearing: 03.03.2020Pronounced: 03.03.2020

Date of hearing 03.03.2020 Date of pronouncement 03.03.2020 O R D E R S. S. Godara(Oral): This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hazaribag, Jharkhand dated 20.06.2017 passed in case no.10076/HZN/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Case called twice. The assessee has filed his adjournment petition dated 28.03.2020. There is nobody to pursue the same, I proceed ex parte therefore.

2.

It transpires from a perusal of the case file and with the able assistance of the learned departmental representative that the dispute between the parties herein is about the nature of capital assets sold. Learned departmental representative fails to dispute that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion has not taken into consideration the relevant documents/materials in the sale deed as to whether the same involved a residential house property or a part of land per se. I therefore deem it appropriate to restore the instant issue back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication. All other remaining issues shall also be considered and adjudicated as per law since incidental to the foregoing section 54F deduction claim only.

I.T.A No.296/Ran/2017 Amit Kumar Saraf

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 03.03.2020.

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →