Mita Haldar vs. ITO, Ward 42(1), Murshidabad

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Mita Haldar, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, which upheld the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The assessee had sold an immovable property for a consideration of ₹14,40,000/-, whereas the value determined by the stamp valuation authority was ₹30,85,500/-. The Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 50C of the Act and adopted the stamp duty value as the full value of the consideration. The assessee contested this substitution as well as the denial of deductions and exemption. The assessee also claimed that the entire actual sale consideration was deposited in the Capital Gains Account Scheme within the prescribed period in compliance with section 54F (4) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in upholding the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in invoking section 50C and adopting the stamp duty valuation of Rs.30,85,500/- in place of the actual sale consideration of Rs. 14,40,000/-.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Mrs. Geeta Narendra Gandhi Vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

  SMC Bench, Mumbai benchAY 2019-20Partly Allowed

• Mukesh Vaikunthlal Mehta vs Income Tax Officer Ward 34(2)(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2011-2012Partly Allowed

• Raghvendra Singh

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed

• Meera Sonthalia vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Asansol

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Polly Saha vs ITO Ward 45(3), Kolkata

  Kolkata bench

• ITA No.297/RJT/2023

  Rajkot bench