What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to keep the appeals pending before the CIT(A) to await the Supreme Court's final outcome. This is to avoid contradictory findings and allow for fresh factual verification after the apex court's decision.

The assessee appealed against the assessment of Annual Letting Value (ALV) of unsold residential property stock. A similar issue was settled in the department's favor by the jurisdictional High Court, and the assessee's appeal against that decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the assessment of Annual Letting Value (ALV) of unsold residential property stock held as stock-in-trade, pending a Supreme Court decision on a similar matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3), Section 260A, Section 254

Ansal Properties & Infrastructure… vs ACIT | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 09.07.2026Pronounced: 09.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 8696 to 8702/Del/2025 Assessment Years: 1988-89, 1990-1991 to 1995-96

Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Vs Assistant Commissioner of Limited Income Tax 115, Ansal Bhawan, 16, K.G. Marg, Central Circle-2, New Delhi- 110 001 ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi- 110055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACA0006D Assessee by: Sh. Amarjeet Singh, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sudip Majumdar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 09.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 09.07.2026 ORDER PER BENCH: These assessee’s seven appeals ITA Nos. 8696 to 8702/Del/2025; for assessment years 1988-99 & 1990- 1991 to 1995-96, arise against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 (in short, ‘CIT(A)’), Delhi’s orders all dated 24.10.2025, passed in case Nos. CIT(A), Delhi-1/10265 to 10270/2018-19, passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 260A r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’, respectively.

Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the assessee’s identical solitary substantive ground for the

2 tribunal’s apt adjudication regarding assessment of its Annual Letting Value (for short, “ALV”) of unsold household property stock which was held as “stock in trade” in its books.

Suffice to say, there is not much a dispute between the parties that hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s landmark decision dated 31.10.2012 in the assessee’s case itself i.e. CIT vs Ansal Properties (2013) 350 ITR 637(Del) had already settled the same in the department’s favour. Faced with this situation, learned counsel invites our attention to the assessee’s detailed written synopsis that its appeal no. 724/2013 against the same stands admitted in hon’ble apex court for final adjudication.

It is in this factual backdrop that we sought to decipher the exact issue raised at the assessee’s behest in the instant batch of seven appeals. We are informed that its identical sole endeavor herein is to exclude some of the residential units lying unsold as out of the purview of the impugned computation of ALV. The Revenue is equally fair in not disputing the same before us.

We are of the considered view that once the entire issue of assessment of the assessee notional ALV of its unsold stock in trade of residential units is pending before the hon’ble apex court in principle, there is hardly much a need for us right now to decide its instant seven appeals seeking to exclude some of the residential units from out of the purview thereof so as to avoid

3 any mutually contradictory findings. We thus deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice that the instant issue deserves to be kept pending before the learned CIT(A) so as to await hon’ble apex court’s final outcome to be followed by the necessary afresh factual verification of the assessee’s unsold residential units herein. We order accordingly. Learned CIT(A) is directed to keep all these assessee’s seven cases in lower appeals in abeyance during the time hon’ble apex court adjudicates the aforesaid main cases. We order accordingly.

All other pleadings between the parties on merits are kept open at this stage.

These assessee’s seven appeals ITA Nos. 8696 to 8702/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be place in the respective case files.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 09.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13.07.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-2, DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments