SHEETAL MALHOTRA,BENGALURU vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(2)(1), BENGALURU

ITA 2248/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 September 2026AY 2013-146 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee sold a property received as a gift, claiming long-term capital gains based on the fair market value as of April 1, 1981. The Assessing Officer (AO) recomputed the gains using the original cost paid by the father and indexed from the year of gift. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's father became the owner of the property on May 24, 1980, by virtue of Section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the assessee was entitled to adopt the fair market value as of April 1, 1981, for computing the cost of acquisition.

What were the issues?

The key issues were the date of acquisition for capital gains computation and the correct cost of acquisition, specifically whether the fair market value as of April 1, 1981, could be adopted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(47),Section 55(2),Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep S - Addl. CIT
Pronounced: 08.09.2026

PER SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT (A) NFAC vide DIN: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1079769116(1) dated 25-Sep-2025 for the Assessment Year 2013-14, arising out of the order passed under Section 263 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act (the Act) dt 11.12.2018 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Briefly sta

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 2(47)

All 831 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(47) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →