SMT. KUSUM KUJWAL,NAINITAL vs. PCIT, BAIREILLY

ITA 102/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 January 2026AY 2020-21Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT upheld the PCIT's revision order, agreeing that the Assessing Officer failed to conduct proper inquiries regarding the nature of the land sale (conversion to plots, real estate business) and the applicability of Section 50C, capital gains, and business profit. The tribunal found the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption for agricultural income from the sale of land. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, finding that the Assessing Officer failed to inquire into the conversion of agricultural land into residential plots and the potential for long-term capital gains and business profit. The PCIT concluded that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue's interest.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer's failure to inquire into the conversion of agricultural land into residential plots and the applicability of capital gains and business profit provisions rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 2(14)(iii),Section 45(2),Section 50C,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT-DR
Hearing: 13.01.2026Pronounced: 13.01.2026

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2020-21, arises against the PCIT, Bareilly’s DIN & order No. ITBA/REV/F/REF5/2024-25/1075212520(1) dated 28.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We make it clear that today is the fifth hearing of the assessee’s instant appeal. We thus proceeded ex-parte.

4.

It next emerges with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned PCIT, Bareilly has exercised his section 263 revision juri iction thereby terming the Assessing

2 Kusum Kujwal

Officer’s regular assessment dated 22.08.2022 as an erroneous one causing preju

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 →