SONIYA DAVID LATHIKA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO WARD 2(3), TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose
ITA 667/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013
Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Soniya David Lathika The Ito, Ward-2(3) S. S. Nivas, Vizhinjam, Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar, Vs. Mukkola, Venganoor, Trivandrum-4 Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan/Gir No. Ajqpl 8228 A (Assessee) : (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri Adarsh BFor Respondent: 13.03.2024
Section 10(37)Section 250
transfer the appellant suffered two disadvantages. One, she did not get the market price obtainable for urban land and two, she became liable to capital gains tax. The narration in the sale deed that if she got a better price than what she would have got from compulsory acquisition she would execute sale deed directly with VISL' is unworthy
