TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Bangalore Remits LTCG & Cash Deposit Issues for Re-examination</h1> <h3>Smt. TV. Nagasena, Versus Income Tax Officer</h3> Smt. TV. Nagasena, Versus Income Tax Officer - TMI Issues:1. Computation of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on the sale of property.2. Addition of unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account.Computation of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on the sale of property:The case involved the dispute over the computation of LTCG on the sale of a property by the assessee. The Assessing Officer substituted the guideline value for stamp duty purposes in place of the actual sale consideration, resulting in a higher LTCG. The assessee objected to this computation, arguing that no notice was issued to invoke section 50C of the Income Tax Act. The assessee requested an opportunity to be heard before invoking the provision and a valuation of the property by the Valuation Officer. The Departmental Representative supported the Assessing Officer's action, stating it was in accordance with the law. The Tribunal noted that section 50C(2) mandates a reference to the Valuation Officer if the assessee challenges the guideline value. As the Assessing Officer did not follow this procedure, the Tribunal remitted the issue back for a fresh computation after valuation by the Valuation Officer, ensuring the assessee's rights were upheld.Addition of unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account:The Assessing Officer added a sum as unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account, which the assessee claimed were savings from money given by her husband. The CIT(A) upheld the addition without further examination. The Tribunal found that the authorities did not adequately investigate the source of the cash deposits. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination and reconsideration of the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the source of the cash deposits. This decision aimed to ensure a proper assessment of the situation and to uphold the principles of natural justice.In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal ITAT, Bangalore addressed the issues of LTCG computation and unexplained cash deposits meticulously, ensuring that the assessee's rights were upheld and that a fair assessment was conducted. The judgment emphasized adherence to legal procedures and principles of justice in resolving the disputes raised by the assessee.
TaxTMI 