PANKISH GOEL,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1611/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 June 2026AY 2017-20184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found substance in the assessee's plea that Section 50C might not be applicable to leasehold rights and that the AO should have called for a DVO report. The issue was complex and required examination of facts and evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee sold a DDA leasehold residential plot and declared capital gains. The Assessing Officer (AO) invoked Section 50C, considering the sale consideration to be less than the circle rate.

What were the issues?

Whether Section 50C of the Income Tax Act is applicable to the transfer of leasehold rights, and whether the AO properly invoked the section without a DVO report.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA&

Hearing: 24.06.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

P a g e | 1 ITA No.1611/Del/2026 Pankish Goel (AY: 2017-18) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, DELHI

BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1611/Del/2026 (Assessment Year: 2017-18)

Pankish Goel Vs. ACIT E-2, Church Complex E-2, Civic Centre Sukhdev Vihar, Minto Road, New Delhi - 110025 New Delhi – 110002 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AANPG6260F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Anil Chopra, CA Respondent by : Sh. Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2026

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18.12.2025 of Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083816220(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 22.11.2019 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1611/Del/2026 Pankish Goel (AY: 2017-18) referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ACIT, Circle 63(1), Delhi for AY: 2017- 18.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that the issue involved in the appeal is the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs.28,09,880/- under the head short term capital gain on account of transfer of DDA leasehold residential plot situated in Rohini, Delhi for which assesse had shown a capital gains of Rs. 6,97,247/- and assessing officer had considered the sale consideration of Rs.21,81,000/- to be lesser than the applicable circle rate of Rs.42,05,000/- thereby invoking the provisions of Section 50C of the Act.

3.

Before us ld. Counsel has submitted that as with regard to sale of leasehold rights provision of Section 50C cannot be invoked and reliance has been placed on certain judicial decisions to contend that transfer of leasehold right does not warrant invocation of provisions of Section 50C of the Act. It was further contended at the time of hearing that in any case as the property rates in the vicinity were not matching the circle rates and there were distress sales due to which the property in the area were being sold on rates lesser than the circle rates but no report of DVO was called.

4.

We find substance in the plea of the assesse with regard to proposition of law that if assessing officer is not satisfied with the valuation then report

P a g e | 3 ITA No.1611/Del/2026 Pankish Goel (AY: 2017-18) of DVO should be called. At the same time we find that the assessing officer had issued a notice calling assesse to justify the claim and why provision of Section 50C be not invoked but there was no response from the assesse and thereupon assessing officer had proceeded to invoke Section 50C. The issue of transfer of leasehold rights not being liable to Section 50C though raised before ld. CIT(A) has not been determined either way. So, we are of the considered view that the nature of leasehold rights and transfer and assignment of same is of question of fact and not merely a question of law and the same needs to be examined on the basis of necessary evidences and circumstances by the ld. Tax authorities including calling for report of DVO. Thus, we consider it appropriate case to set aside the impugned orders and restore the issue on merits as well as points of law to the assessing officer to give fresh opportunity of hearing to the assesse and pass order afresh.

5.

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Amitabh Shukla) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated 30.06.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS

P a g e | 4 ITA No.1611/Del/2026 Pankish Goel (AY: 2017-18)

More judgments on Section 50C

All 3,223 judgments and leading authorities on Section 50C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →