THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR vs. SHRI VALLABHBHAI DHANJIBHAI PATEL, BHAVNAGAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the initial sale deed was void ab initio due to non-compliance with the Gujarat Tenancy Law regarding conversion of land and obtaining Collector's permission. Therefore, the cancellation deed did not constitute a transfer for capital gains purposes.
What were the facts?
The assessee and co-owners purchased agricultural land, but later executed a cancellation deed due to unclear title. The AO treated the JANTRI value on the cancellation date as undisclosed income, deeming it a capital gain. The CIT(A) deleted the addition.
What were the issues?
Whether the cancellation of a sale deed for agricultural land, which was void ab initio due to non-compliance with tenancy laws, constitutes a transfer for capital gains tax and if Section 50C is applicable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar
PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Revenue as against the appellate order dated 23.09.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 34 days in filing the above appeal. This appeal is filed before the Tribunal on I.T.A No. 07/Ahd/2021 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 15.01.2021, this period falls under COVID-19 Pandemic situation. Thus following Hon’b
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.
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 45
- Mukesh Mishra, Thane vs ACIT, Circle 1, ThaneITA 5853/MUM/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Sip Infotech Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 5355/MUM/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2019-2020
- Rajiv Kumar, Delhi vs DCIT, Circle 67(1), DelhiITA 3538/DEL/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- DCIT 19 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs Nisha Jhaveri, MumbaiITA 2389/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Arokiaswamy Velumani, Bengaluru vs Income Tax Officer 15(3)(1), MumbaiITA 1946/MUM/2026[2023-2024]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026