KAPILA MAHENDRA PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

ITA 1905/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 January 2026AY 2024-25Bench: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member), SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that neither the CPC nor the CIT(A) had properly verified crucial factual aspects, such as the actual co-ownership share, the terms of the rent agreement, and whether other co-owners had offered their share of income. Concluding that the matter required further examination on merits, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and the CPC's adjustment. The case was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with directions to verify all factual contentions and provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed her ITR, which the CPC processed under Section 143(1), making an upward adjustment of Rs. 10,81,500/- under 'Income from House Property'. This adjustment was based on treating the assessee as 100% owner of a property she claimed to co-own with a 25% share, attributing the error in the return to a clerical mistake. Despite the assessee's response to the 143(1)(a) notice, CPC proceeded with the adjustment, and the CIT(A) upheld this action, dismissing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether an adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) for 'Income from House Property' is valid when the assessee claims a clerical error in reporting ownership percentage of a jointly owned property, necessitating factual verification of co-ownership and income attribution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 143(1)(a),Section 24,Section 26

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, AR
Hearing: 13/01/2026Pronounced: 19/01/2026

PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order passed by the office of the Commissioner of Income-Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-2 Bengaluru [hereinafter referred to as “PCIT”] dated 01/09/2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2024-25. 2. The assessee has taken the following Grounds of Appeal:- “1. The Ld. AddI/JCIT(A)-2, Bengaluru has grossly erred in law and in facts in dismissing the a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 24

All 701 judgments and leading authorities on Section 24 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →