VAIDYA SRIKANTAPPA SADASHIVAIAH SRIKANTH,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE- 1, , BANGALORE

ITA 200/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 August 2024AY 2018-1930 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the property was acquired under the KIADB Act 1966, not the RFCTLAAR Act 2013. It relied on a previous Tribunal decision that held similar acquisitions under the KIADB Act do not qualify for exemption under the RFCTLAAR Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption on capital gains from property acquired by KIADB for metro work, asserting it was under the RFCTLAAR Act 2013. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, arguing the acquisition was under the KIADB Act 1966, not the RFCTLAAR Act 2013, making the exemption claim erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the exemption claimed under the RFCTLAAR Act 2013 is valid when the property acquisition was conducted under the KIADB Act 1966. Whether the PCIT was justified in invoking Section 263 due to the Assessing Officer's alleged lack of inquiry.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 45(5),Section 54

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Hearing: 30.05.2024Pronounced: 01.08.2024

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by assessee is directed against order of PCIT/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19 dated 6.12.2023 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).

2.

Facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed return of income for AY 2018-19 on 30-03-2019 by declaring total income of Rs 4,06,38,068/- with tax payable amount of Rs 1,84,24,220/-. The scrutiny assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 22-04-2021, determining the total income at Rs 8,45,68,068/- after disallowing Rs.4,25,00,000/- claimed u/s 5

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 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →