← All Phrases

“circle rate”

Capital GainsSection 50CSection 50C478 judgments

DARSHINI AMIT SHARMA,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, DAMAN, DAMAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1345/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 50(1)Section 50C(1)Section 56(2)(x)

Section 50C is. In terms of this provision, if the property is sold\nbelow the stamp duty valuation rate, which is often called circle rate, this stamp\nduty valuation report is assumed as sale consideration for the property in\nquestion, and, accordingly, capital gains tax is levied. This deeming fiction

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MANOJ KUMAR SINGH, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8069/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 132ASection 153DSection 28

Delhi) without conducting any independent enquiry or valuation to ascertain the fair market value of the said property and ignoring the consideration and circle rate mentioned in the sale deed. Unexplained Investment in Properties - INR 7,95,88,000/- (Section 69) 9. Because Ld. CIT(A) has erred

MANOJ KUMAR SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT(A) CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6383/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 132ASection 153DSection 28

Delhi) without conducting any independent enquiry or valuation to ascertain the fair market value of the said property and ignoring the consideration and circle rate mentioned in the sale deed. Unexplained Investment in Properties - INR 7,95,88,000/- (Section 69) 9. Because Ld. CIT(A) has erred

SIDH FARMS,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 55(5), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the addition made by the Ld

ITA 6672/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6672/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम M/S Sidh Farms Income Tax Officer, 32, Dsidc Jhilmil Industrial Area, Vs. Ward 55(5), Room No.401, Delhi – 110095. D-Block, Vikas Bhawan, Pan No.Acofs1102P I.P. Estate, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

passed by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. In this case, the assessee is seen to have purchase land at Rs.74,09,555/- even when the circle rate was Rs.1,32,18,000/-. The Ld. AO brought the differentia amount (Rs.58

M/S K G CONSTRUCTION,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT-CC-1, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 120/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Vachaspati, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

immovable properties (stock in trade) in contravention of section 43CA during the year. The details of these properties were as under:- S. Date of Circle Rate (Rs.) Consideration Difference u/s No. Registry (Rs.) 43CA ... Total=34,69,070 2.1 Since the consideration was below 80% of the total circle rate and outside the permissible limit of relaxation in force during the year, he added back the sum of Rs. 34,69,070/- to the income of the assessee and initiated penalty proceedings under section

ABDULLATIF IBRAHIM BADARPURA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 8407/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 153Section 250

been paid in installments and to the tune of Rs. 20,09,100/- in total, through banking channel, as against the stamp duty value (circle rate) of Rs. 15,17,292/-. 6. The Assessee in response to the said show cause submitted its reply, relevant part of the which

ABDULLATIF IBRAHIM BADARPURA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 8406/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 153Section 250

been paid in installments and to the tune of Rs. 20,09,100/- in total, through banking channel, as against the stamp duty value (circle rate) of Rs. 15,17,292/-. 6. The Assessee in response to the said show cause submitted its reply, relevant part of the which

ASHOK HANJAJI MALI,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 7804/MUM/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 153Section 250

been paid in installments and to the tune of Rs. 20,09,100/- in total, through banking channel, as against the stamp duty value (circle rate) of Rs. 15,17,292/-. 6. The Assessee in response to the said show cause submitted its reply, relevant part of the which

ASHOK HANJAJI MALI,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2)MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 7803/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 153Section 250

been paid in installments and to the tune of Rs. 20,09,100/- in total, through banking channel, as against the stamp duty value (circle rate) of Rs. 15,17,292/-. 6. The Assessee in response to the said show cause submitted its reply, relevant part of the which

BIHARI PARMANAND KANDHARI,MUMBAI vs. ACI, CIRCLE -23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7925/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Respondent: Mr. Akshay Jain
Section 56(2)

verification of the agreement and the advance payments, the AO shall and the advance payments, the AO shall ascertain the official scertain the official Circle Rate or Stamp Duty Value Stamp Duty Value applicable to the specific pr applicable to the specific property category and location as of category ... receipt of funds in 2011 (iv) Official available) acknowledging the receipt of funds in 2011 available) acknowledging the receipt of funds in 2011 Circle Rate Notification Circle Rate Notification from the relevant State Authority applicable from the relevant State Authority applicable for October 2011. 4. In the result, the appeal

PRAFULLA KUMAR MALAKAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KALAWATI INVESTMENTS & TRADING P LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 134/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

this connection I refer to the general view on the topic of conveyance of immovable properties. The rates/sale prices are at variance with the circle rates fixed by the Registration authorities of the Government in most cases and the general impression is that cash would have changed hands. The courts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,DELHI-8, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI vs. POOJA MITTAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1336/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year 2014-15 Dcit Vs. Pooja Mittal B-33, Defece Central Circle Colony, Delhi-110024 Delhi Pan No. Ahapm5624K Appellant Respondent Appellant Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Respondent Sh. Akshat Jain, Ca Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 69A

Viram Infrastructure Private Limited vide registered sale deed dated 19.10.2013 for total consideration of Rs. 40,00,000/- which is above the Circle rate of said land at that time (ii) The said Land was not sold to the buyer (i.e. Sh. Anil Narang) as mentioned in the alleged "Agreement ... done of said property from the Govt. approved valuer to rebut the claim of the appellant that the said Land was sold as per Circle rate at that time. 4.1.4 Further, the AR of the appellant has also contended that the appellant has sold the said Land to Vitam Infrastructure

ROHIT MANCHAND,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 5(3)(2), GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5124/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50cSection 54

well as on merits in wrongly estimating the total cost of acquisition of complete property at Rs.54,90,000/- being 30% of circle rate at the time of sale being Rs.1,83,00,000/- and further erred in not giving the indexation benefit, thus erred in calculating LTCG at Rs.1

UNITECH RESIDENTIAL RESORTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4409/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 250

village Badshahapur distt Gurgaon. It would be needless to mention here that since the exchanged properties are in the same vicinity therefore circle rate of the properties are same. Enclosed please find the circle rates in the area in the F.Y 2012-13 relevant for the A/Y 2013-14, Further ... sale value of such land. On verification of the 3 | P a g e ITA Nos.4408 & 4409/Del/2019 transfer deed, it was found that the circle rate of the property is Rs. 3,88,12,500/- [Rs. 3,77,81,250/- +Rs. 10,31,250/- (Rs. 79,68,750/11/859

UNITECH REALITY PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4408/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 250

village Badshahapur distt Gurgaon. It would be needless to mention here that since the exchanged properties are in the same vicinity therefore circle rate of the properties are same. Enclosed please find the circle rates in the area in the F.Y 2012-13 relevant for the A/Y 2013-14, Further ... sale value of such land. On verification of the 3 | P a g e ITA Nos.4408 & 4409/Del/2019 transfer deed, it was found that the circle rate of the property is Rs. 3,88,12,500/- [Rs. 3,77,81,250/- +Rs. 10,31,250/- (Rs. 79,68,750/11/859

BRAJBHUMI NIRMAAN PRIVATE LIMITED,SALT LAKE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2605/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2026AY 2015-2016
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

ncompany along with its subsidiaries ought to be valued at their\nprevailing fair market value, i.e. stamp duty value. Referring to the\ndetails of circle rates of the land parcels owned by it, the assessee\nshowed that the fair market value worked out at Rs. 126.87 crores as\nagainst ... higher than the issue price of Rs.\n189.40/share. The Id. AO is noted to have rejected this explanation on\nthe premise that the circle rates were not recorded in the books of\naccounts. For such reasons, the AO rejected the DCF valuation report\nfurnished by the assessee in terms

CHANDRA LALIT SANGHVI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7535/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2017-18 Chandra Lalit Sanghvi, Income Tax Officer, 25-26, 6Th Floor, Ward-19(1)(1), Western Court Building, Vs. Piramal Chamber, 83, Netaji Subhash Road, Mumbai-400012. Marine Drive, Mumbai-400002. Pan : Acips3131J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ketan Vajani For Revenue : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 02-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-02-2026 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VajaniFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 5O

Section 50C is. In terms of this provision, if the property is sold below the stamp duty valuation rate, which is often called circle rate, this stamp duty valuation report is assumed as sale consideration for the property in question, and, accordingly, capital gains tax is levied. This deeming fiction

CHHEDI LAL,RAEBARELI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAEBARELI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 87/LKW/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: the Assessing Officer and furnished submissions. After considering the submissions and making necessary enquiries, the Assessing Officer adopted the stamp duty valuation u/s 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act” for short) and assessed the total income at Rs.31,95,000/. Aggrieved by this, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee, thereby directed the Assessing Officer to consider the value of new residence of property at Rs.8,97,0

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 159Section 50C

Authority, to buttress the contention that the AO was Page 3 of 4 justified in adopting the value of property on the basis of circle rate. 5. Heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the materials available on records. It is pointed

RAVINDRABHAI SHANKARBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5) NOW ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: PendingITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Ito Ravindrabhai Shankarbhai Vs. Ward-1(2)(5). Patel Now Ito, Ward-1(2)(2) 86,Kanha Residency Vadodara – 390 007 Kalali Road, Kalali Ahmedabad – 390 012 [Pan : Aigpp 8415 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Assessee Represented By : Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue Represented By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 54BSection 54F

recorded that the full consideration had been received, an additional amount became payable subsequently to align the transaction value with the prevailing jantri or circle rate fixed by the land revenue authorities. For this purpose, a Memorandum of Understanding dated Ravindrabhai Shankarbhai Patel

VIKAS AGARWAL,SAMBHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAMBHAL, SAMBHAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6268/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Saim, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

assessee had purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs. 11,00,000/- jointly with another person during the year under consideration. The circle rate valuation of the property was Rs. 1,88,98,000/-. Thus, total investment in the property worked out at Rs. 24,46,020/- [purchase

Showing 1–20 of 478 · Page 1 of 24

...