INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VASUDEV TRIPATHI, AHMEDABAD
THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH
Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President
And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member
The ITO,
Ward-5(3)(2),
PAN: AAHPT9885F
(Respondent)
Assessee by: Shri Deepak Shah, A.R.
Revenue by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R.
Date of hearing
: 04-09-2025
Date of pronouncement
: 15-10-2025
आदेश/ORDER
Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 09-01-2025
passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2014-15. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the impugned notice having been issued beyond four years from the last date of the relevant assessment year, without appreciating the fact that the case of the assessee pertains to AY 2014-15 and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued in the case of the assessee on 13.03.2019 which is well within four years from the end of the relevant year?"
Assessment Year 2014-15
I.T.A No. 297/Ahd/2025
Vasudev Tripathi, A.Y. 2014-15
2
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition u/s 50C of the Act of Rs. 5,68,77,945/ on account of LTCG without appreciating the facts of the ease?
The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary.
It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.?"
The assessee is an individual and not filed return of income for assessment year 2014-15. As per the information available with the Assessing Officer, the case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act after recording reasons and prior approval of the competent authority. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 13-03-2019 through ITBA on assessee’s email as well as by speed post and was duly served upon the assessee. In response to the notice u/s. 148, the assessee had not filed his return of income for assessment year 2014-15. Thereafter, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued to the assessee with a request to furnish his return of income. The assessee vide submission dated 27-12-2019 stated that the assessee filed return in response to notice u/s. 148 on 27-12- 2019 declaring total income at Rs. 5,13,930/-. The Assessing Officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee sold land in parts to different parties through sale deed No. 6867/2013 and 6868/2013 on 26-09-2013. The sale consideration of the properties were taken as Rs. 1,79,00,000/- and Rs. 2,13,50,000/- on which stamp duty of Rs. 22,12,500/- and Rs. 25,88,000/- were paid. Accordingly, the jantry value i.e. stamp duty valuation of the properties comes to Rs. 4,51,50,000/- and Rs. 5,28,15,945/- which exceeded the sale value consideration of the properties. Thus, the Assessing
I.T.A No. 297/Ahd/2025
Vasudev Tripathi, A.Y. 2014-15
3
Officer held that the provisions of section 50C applies in the case of assessee. After issuing statutory notices, the assessee filed submissions. After going through the submissions, the Assessing
Officer pointed out the following points which are as follows:-
•
The assessee had entered into agreement to sale (Banakhat) of land at Survey
No. 597 sarkehej vide agreement No. 406 dated 29/12/2009 with Siraj
Nagani and agreement No.333 dated 24.10.2009 with Salim Nagani. The said documents were notiarized with notary. It is important to mention that the documents were only notarized but not registered. No agreement is valid till it is registered with Sub