Successful appeal condones delay, rectifies capital gains computation error. Section 154 rectification emphasized.

The appeal was successful in this case. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned based on the principle of substantial justice. Additionally, the tribunal allowed the rectification application regarding the computation of long term capital gains, directing the Assessing Officer to reconsider the matter. The decision underscores the significance of accurate calculations in capital gains and the availability of rectification under section 154 for correcting apparent mistakes in records. The tribunal's ruling stresses the importance of factual verification and compliance with the law in similar cases.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Summary:

Issue 1: Condonation of delay in filing appeal
The appellant sought condonation of a 16-day delay in filing the appeal citing the principle of substantial justice as per the decision in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji. The delay was condoned.

Issue 2: Rectification of long term capital gains computation
The appellant contended that the mistake in adopting historical value instead of Fair Market Value of land as on 01.04.1981 for computing long term capital gains was apparent from the record and should have been rectified under section 154. The appellant's rectification application was initially rejected, but the tribunal reversed the decision, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes and directing the Assessing Officer to decide the rectification petition afresh.

Significant Points:
- The appellant filed a rectification application claiming that the correct computation of long term capital gains required considering the Fair Market Value of the property as on 01.04.1981.
- The assessing authority and the lower appellate discussion held that rectification under section 154 was not available for such a course of action.
- The tribunal referred to a similar case and highlighted the discrepancy in the treatment of cost of acquisition/indexation between the appellant and the appellant's co-owner.
- The tribunal reversed the decision of the lower authorities, allowing the rectification petition and directing the Assessing Officer to decide the matter afresh.

This judgment highlights the importance of correct computation of long term capital gains and the applicability of rectification under section 154 in cases where mistakes are apparent from the record. The tribunal's decision emphasizes the need for factual verification and adherence to the law in such matters.

---