ASHOK URMALIYA,JABALPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE (2)1, JABALPUR

ITA 116/JAB/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 August 2026AY 2013-147 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the authorities below did not appreciate the facts correctly. The assessee had provided documentary evidence, including an Adhikar Patra, indicating possession was handed over in 2005. The AO failed to conduct proper inquiry to rebut this evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed long-term capital gains (LTCG) on the sale of land. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment, treating the gain as short-term capital gain (STCG) because the sale deed was executed in 2011, though an agreement was made in 2005. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the transfer of immovable property for the purpose of capital gains occurred in 2005 (as per agreement and possession) or 2011 (as per sale deed execution), and if the AO properly considered evidence of possession.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 2(47),Section 53A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “DB”, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI, GD PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, Advocate, Shri Sachin Bajpai, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Rahul Padha, JC-2

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, filed by the assessee, against the order dated 14.05.2024 of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred as to “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has filed the following revised concise grounds of appeal: -

“1. That the Ld CIT (A)/NFAC have grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to dismiss the appeal without appreciating the facts properly.

2.

That the notice issued U/s 148 of IT Act, 1961, dated 31/11/2017 after completion of assessmen U's 143(3) of IT Act, 1961, dated 18/01/2016 without bringing any new facts is er

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →