CHARANJEET SINGH LABANA,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AMBALA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the registered purchase document of the property by the assessee's father is a material document for determining the cost of acquisition. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for recomputation of capital gain after examining the purchase deed and allowing indexation.
What were the facts?
The assessee's share of Rs. 15,00,000/- from the sale of property was treated as Long Term Capital Gain by the AO without granting the benefit of cost of acquisition and indexation. The property was originally purchased by the assessee's father.
What were the issues?
Whether the benefit of indexation on the cost of acquisition in the hands of the previous owner (father) should be allowed for computing capital gains. Whether the matter should be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication based on newly produced documents.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI VIJAY VARMA
PER LALIET KUMAR, JM
This is an appeal filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mysore [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 06.01.2026 passed for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee had originally declared total income of Rs.2,22,450/-. The assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ITA 512/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2012-13 2 basis of information regarding sale of immovable property during Financial Year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026