DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DHANANJAYA RAO VISWANADHA, VISAKHAPATNAM
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following a previous ruling on identical facts concerning a co-owner. The actual sale consideration was directed to be adopted for computing capital gains.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition made towards short-term capital gains under Section 50C. The addition was based on the stamp valuation authority's higher value than the declared consideration.
What were the issues?
Whether Section 50C of the Income Tax Act is applicable when the date of agreement and registration are different, and advance consideration was received prior to property acquisition.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :
This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 11.02.2026 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide DIN & Order No.
ITA 454/VIZ/2026 Dhananjaya Rao Viswanadha ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1085882427(1) for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :
The order of the Ld. C
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 50C
- M N S Barium Salts, Kadapa vs ITO, Ward-1, KadapaITA 2412/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sawalchand Chunilal Bafna HUF, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer-16(1)(1), MumbaiITA 7492/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Jagdishbhai Vasharambhai Italiya, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 150/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Rohini Ramhari Bhadale, Pune vs Assessing Officer Ward 2(2) Pune, PuneITA 2767/PUN/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Sweta Somani, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 44(2), KolkataITA 1656/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
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