Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee sold land and was assessed for capital gains, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee claims a lesser share in the property and deductions for investment in a new house.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and directed the AO to re-verify the assessee's claims regarding share, investment, and indexed cost of acquisition.
Key Issues
Dispute regarding the correct share in the property sold and the validity of deductions claimed for investment in a new house affecting the computation of capital gains.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 54, 54F
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Sachin Tyagi ITO, Ward No.4, (S/o Subhash Chand) Yamuna Nagar-135001 बनाम/ House No. 524, Ward No.22, Vs. Gobindpuri, Yamuna Nagar- 135001. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AJAPT-0842-Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Rajeev Sachdeva (CA) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 09-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30-08-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 30-11-2019. The registry has noted delay of 172 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of affidavit of the assessee. The delay has been attributed to lapse on the part of representing counsel. Considering the period of delay and pleadings made in the condonation affidavit, we condone the delay and proceed for adjudication of appeal on merits. The sole grievance of the assessee is computation of capital gains. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed- off as under.
The assessee, along with co-owners, sold land measuring 426.9 Square Yards for Rs.128.07 Lacs on 17-10-2011. As per Ld. AO, the assessee was having ½ share in the same. Since the assessee did not file return of income, the case was reopened and various notices were issued to the assessee. However, the assessee failed to respond to hearing notices and accordingly, Ld. AO assessed capital gains of Rs.59.84 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for the same very reason. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The Ld. AR took us through the copy of sale deed as placed on Page Nos. 65 to 74 of the paper book and stated that the assessee was having only 1/4th share on the property but the same has wrongly been considered as ½ share by Ld. AO. Another point raised by Ld. AR is that the assessee made investment in new house and claimed deduction u/s 54/54F for Rs.12.39 Lacs which nullified the capital gains as earned by the assessee. The Ld. AR also stated that indexed cost of acquisition has been computed by the assessee as Rs.19.62 Lacs as is evident from revised return of income as filed by the assessee. The Ld. AR stated that aforesaid computations are duly supported by valuation reports, the copies of which are placed on record.
Finding strength in all the above arguments of Ld. AR, we direct Ld. AO to re-verify the aforesaid claim of the assessee and re-compute the capital gains, if any, which are liable to be assessed in the hands of the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate the computations. No other ground has been urged in the appeal.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21-04-2025.