PARVATIBEN GOHIL,KHEDA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, NADIAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1448/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 October 2025AY 2019-20Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)1 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 noted that the assessee was one of 20 co-owners and received Rs. 1,77,000/-, which was below the taxable limit. Consequently, no addition was warranted.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeal. The grounds of appeal contested the addition of Rs. 38,25,000/- as short-term capital gain on the sale of rural agricultural land.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of capital gains on the sale of rural agricultural land is justified when the assessee's share is below the taxable limit and it's not a capital asset.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri B T Thakkar, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.10.2025Pronounced: 08.10.2025

O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 24.03.2025 relevant to the Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in dismissing appeal of your appellant without considering facts of the case of your appellant.

2.

The sale being that of rural agricultural land not being a capital asset, entire sum of Rs. 38,25,000/- added as short term capital gain be directed to be deleted now. (Total Tax effect relating to ground Rs.2,16,624/-) Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 2– 3. Your appellant prays to add, amend or alter ground of appeal at the time of hearing.

3. The Assessing Officer made an addition of the entire amount of the receipt on account of the sale of property, ignoring the fact that the assessee is only one of the 20 co-owners and had received an amount of Rs. 1,77,000/-. The assessee does not have any other source of income. Since the amount received is below the taxable limit, no addition is warranted in this case.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →