KAMALUDDIN HAMED SALMANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 9(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1284/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 October 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)24 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the original assessment u/s 143(3) was completed after the AO had examined the assessee's claim for exemption u/s 54F, for which all relevant details were furnished. The reopening of the assessment u/s 147/148 was based on the same material already available to the AO during the original assessment proceedings, constituting a 'mere change of opinion'. Citing High Court and Supreme Court precedents, the Tribunal held that reopening an assessment based on a mere change of opinion, without any fresh tangible material, is not permissible and is bad in law, thus quashing the reassessment order.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return for AY 2016-17, which was originally assessed u/s 143(3). The assessee sold land for Rs. 2,01,85,000/-, generating a capital gain, and claimed exemption u/s 54F for an investment of Rs. 1,63,25,000/- made by taking possession of a house property in lieu of a loan given to a GPA holder. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment u/s 147/148, adding the unutilized amount of Rs. 1,63,25,000/- as Long Term Capital Gain, citing non-fulfillment of Section 54F requirements. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, upholding the addition but directing credit for TDS.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on a 'mere change of opinion' when the original assessment under Section 143(3) was completed after due scrutiny. A secondary issue involves the eligibility of the assessee for capital gains exemption under Section 54F when a residential property is acquired by adjusting an outstanding loan.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 143(3),Section 194(1A),Section 45,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 54F,Section 54F(1),Section 54F(4),Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.AR

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Kamaluddin Hamed Salmani, R/o.22-7-270/17, Diwan Devdi, 500002, Hyderabad. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 9(1), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →