PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-3, DELHI vs. SHARAN SVADHA LLP
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal held that Section 50C of the Act is applicable only to a vendor or seller of a property, not to a purchaser. Therefore, the provision was wrongly invoked against the assessee.
What were the facts?
The Department invoked Section 50C of the Income Tax Act against the assessee, a purchaser of property, based on the stamp duty paid. The assessee had purchased the property for Rs. 7,84,00,000, while the stamp duty paid was Rs. 12,34,00,000.
What were the issues?
Whether Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, applies to a purchaser of immovable property. The applicability of Section 50C to a transaction where the assessee is the buyer and not the seller.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 750/2023 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-3, DELHI
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. SC
with Mr. Parth Semwal, SC.
versus
SHARAN SVADHA LLP
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gaurav Jain and Mr.
Shubham Gupta, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR
KAURAV
O R D E R %
09.02.2024
The Department has assailed the validity of the judgment rendered by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“ITAT”] dated 11 October 2022. 2. The issue itself arises out of the invocation of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act”] against the respondent / assessee in respect of a transaction relating to an immovable property to which it was a party. Undisputedly, the respondent / assessee had purchased the subject property for an amount of Rs.7,84,00,000/-. The respondent / assessee took into consideration the fact that the stamp duty paid in respect of that transaction was amounting to Rs.12,34,00,000/-. It was perhaps on that basis that the Department proceeded on the premise that Section 50C of the Act would be applicable. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 15:08:10
The ITAT has found that the aforesaid provision has been wrongly invoked bearing in mind the fact that it would apply only to an assessee who has received consideration or to whom consideration may have been paid as a result of the transfer of a capital asset. 4. Section 50C of the Act thus, on its plain language, is clearly concerned with the vendor or the seller of the property in question. The said provision can have no application to a purchaser. 5. In view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in the instant appeal. Consequently, the appeal fails and shall stand dismissed.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. FEBRUARY 9, 2024/p
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 15:08:10
More judgments on Section 50C
- M N S Barium Salts, Kadapa vs ITO, Ward-1, KadapaITA 2412/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sawalchand Chunilal Bafna HUF, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer-16(1)(1), MumbaiITA 7492/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Jagdishbhai Vasharambhai Italiya, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 150/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Rohini Ramhari Bhadale, Pune vs Assessing Officer Ward 2(2) Pune, PuneITA 2767/PUN/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Sweta Somani, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 44(2), KolkataITA 1656/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026