BANI A K DHILLON,SHAMGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 248/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not clarify whether the gifted land was a capital asset. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee received land as a gift without consideration. The stamp value of the land was Rs. 50.50 lakhs, which was added to her income under Section 56(2)(viib). The assessee claimed the donor was a relative but failed to prove it due to communication gaps.

What were the issues?

Whether the gifted land qualifies as a capital asset for the purpose of Section 56(2)(viib) and if the donor falls under the exempt category of relatives.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(viib),Section 56(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 23.04.2026Pronounced: 23.04.2026

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083522082(1), dated 10.12.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

ITA No.248/Del/2026 Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires during the course of hearing that the assessee’s solitary substantive issue raised herein is directed against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment findings dated 05.12.2018, making section 56(2)(viib) addition of Rs. 52,38,125/- in her hands which stands upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, learned counsel has filed before us a copy of the relevant gift deed executed by Smt. Sukhsanjam Kaur /donor in her name on 16.03.2011 out of bequeathing the land in question situated in the revenue estate of village Shamgarh Tehsil Nilokheri, Karnal in her favour without any consideration. The said land admittedly had stamp value of Rs. 50.50 lakhs which forms subject matter of addition for our apt adjudication. Learned counsel’s case is that it was on account of various communication gaps that the assessee could not pleaded and prove here aforesaid donor as falling in the exempt category of relatives u/s 56(2) of the Act. There is further no denial to the fact that both the learned lower authorities’ respective findings have nowhere made it clear as to whether the land bequeathed in the assessee’s favour forms 2 | P a g e

ITA No.248/Del/2026 a capital asset or not u/s 56(2)(viib) r.w.s Explanation-(d) thereto or not.

4.

Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to CIT(A)/NFAC for his fresh adjudication as per law preferably within three effective opportunities; at her risk and responsibility, in foregoing terms. All other remaining legal as well as factual issues are kept open at this stage.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 12.05.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 56(2)(viib)

All 746 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(viib) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →