Should capital gains tax liability be determined on the sale of land along with construction?


Last updated: 26 October 2021

Court :
ITAT Delhi

Brief :
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals], Meerut dated 29.01.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10.

Citation :
ITA No. 2286/DEL/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH,
NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE]
BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 2286/DEL/2018
[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Smt Vimlesh Devi

Gali No. 4, Kankerkhera

Meerut, Uttar Pradesh

vs

The I.T.O

Ward – 2(4)

New Delhi

Date of Hearing : 20.10.2021
Date of Pronouncement : 20.10.2021
Assessee by : Shri Ramit Kakkar, CA
Revenue by : Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR
ORDER

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the view of the Assessing Officer that the impugned property is a capital asset.
 

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that as per TEP information, the Assessing Officer came to know that the assessee has sold a certain piece of land situated at Khatauli District, Muzaffarnagar for a consideration of Rs. 11,31,540/– on which stamp duty value was determined at Rs. 18,85,900/–. When this information was confronted to the assessee asking her to explain as to why capital gains tax liability should not be determined on the sale of land along with construction, the assessee, in her reply, strongly objected claiming that there was no construction on the said piece of land.

3. A detailed enquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer on the directions of the ld. CIT(A) and reported that the office of the Municipal Corporation Parishad has stated that the impugned property is located in Pargana Khatauli Budhana Road, Khatauli and was actually on 500 metres from the municipal limit. The ld. CIT(A), referring to the documents received from the office of Nagar Palika Parishad, Khatauli came to the conclusion that the findings of the Assessing Officer remained uncontroverted and therefore, no interference is called for in the order of the Assessing Officer.

4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 2286/DEL/2018 is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court in the presence of both the representatives on 20.10.2021.

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement
 

 

Poojitha Raam Vinay pro badge
Published in Income Tax
Views : 179
downloaded 265 times

Comments




CCI Pro

Follow us
add to google news


Company
Featured 16 July 2026
CA Inter, CA Intermediate, CA IPCC, CA CPT , CA SemiQualifie

Vakilsearch.com

Chennai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 20 June 2026
Articleship

RB KESHRI & CO

Mumbai

B.Com

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 30 June 2026
Taxation Content Writer Intern

Interactive Media Pvt Ltd.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
22 June 2026
Finance Manager- Chartered Accountant

Triveni Turbine Limited

Bengaluru

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 08 July 2026
Article internship

AJAY SINGH AND CO LLP

Thane

CA Final

View Details
Company
19 June 2026
Accounts Executive

Getfive Advisors Pvt. Ltd.

Ahmedabad

CA Inter

View Details
Company
06 July 2026
Accountant

Agarwal Anoop and Associates

Noida

CA Final

View Details
Company
29 June 2026
Accountant (Finance & Compliance)

TRIEYEZ

Kolkata

CA

View Details