SARAS METALS PVT. LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the alternate ground raised by the assessee regarding the computation of capital gains was not adjudicated by the lower authorities. Both parties agreed that the matter should be remanded.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was recalled because a specific ground regarding the computation of capital gains on a plot of land was not adjudicated. The assessee argued that if the plot was considered an investment, long-term capital gains should have been computed with indexation.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower authorities correctly computed capital gains on the sale of a plot of land, specifically whether indexation should have been applied for long-term capital gains.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Amit ShuklaDr. B. R. R. Kumar
ORDER
Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-X, New Delhi dated 01.03.2013.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the appeal vide 06.05.2015. The said order has been recalled vide order dated 24.06.2016 for the reason that “when the plot of land is held to be investment then the benefit of indexation in case it is long term capital asset is required to be allowed, has remained to be adjudicated”.
2 Saras Metals Pvt. Ltd.
During the hearing before us, it was submitted that the order has been recalled for the limited issue of adjudication of ground no. (5) only which is as under: “5. Because, without prejudice to above and only in alternative, even if the Plot is held as 'investment’ for argument sake than also both the learned lower authorities have wrongly computed/upheld short term capital gain on sale of such plot despite repeatedly stating in the orders that the plot is held for more than 3 years and so only long term capital gain could be computed by indexing the cost etc in terms of sections 48 of the Act and hence , computation is wrong being against the specific provisions of law.”
From the record, we find that this alternate ground has not been adjudicated by the ld. CIT (A). The representatives of both the parties have fairly conceded that the case needs to be remanded to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to adjudicate the above said ground. Hence, keeping in view, the interest of the justice, we hereby remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate and pass a speaking order on the issue of taxation of capital gain correctly.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 14/10/2019
More judgments on Section 48
- Hansaben Babubhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 4(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2762/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Mukesh Mishra, Thane vs ACIT, Circle 1, ThaneITA 5853/MUM/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Dy. Commissioner of Income… vs Thomas Myladiyil Augustine, AhmedabadITA 1131/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Banwari, Bhiwadi vs ITO, BhiwadiITA 1710/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Reshma Dilip Ramrakhyani, Gandhidham vs ITO Ward 2 Gandhidham, GandhidhamITA 895/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Rep Thr The Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)Jharkhand · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026