SARWATI URF SARVATI DEVI,KHURJA vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), BULANDSHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1443/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 November 2021AY 2009-106 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following its own previous decision in the case of a co-owner for the same assessment year, directed the AO to delete the addition made on account of capital gains.

What were the facts?

The assessee sold an immovable property, and the Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition on account of capital gains, finding the assessee's explanation unsatisfactory. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was unsuccessful.

What were the issues?

Whether the capital gains on the sale of immovable property were correctly computed and brought to tax, considering the assessee's explanation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. AMIT SHUKLA

Hearing: 24/11/2021Pronounced: 24/11/2021

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A), Aligarh dated 14.11.2017 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

The grievance of the assessee read as under :-

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee though a written submission has been filed. We heard the DR at length. Case record carefully perused.

4.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on the basis of information received through AIR the Assessing Officer came to know that the assessee has sold an immovable property valued at Rs.39397000/- in which the share of the assessee is 1/3rd of the total value i.e.13132333/-. The assessee was asked to explain the nature of transaction and why capital gain on the sale of impugned property was not shown.

4. Assessee filed a reply but the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the reply and concluded assessment proceedings as under :-

5.

Assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) but without any success.

6.

We find that in one of the co-owners i.e. Jitender Kumar, this Tribunal in for A.Y.2009-10 held as under :-

7.

Respectfully following the findings of this Tribunal (supra) we direct the AO to delete the impugned addition.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed.

9.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of Sr. DR on 24.11.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →