Capital gains from a joint development agreement were remanded for fresh adjudication after factual cancellation claims were not fully examined.

The dispute concerned addition of capital gains arising from a joint development agreement, where the assessee argued that the agreement was later cancelled and that no development activity had occurred. Because these factual assertions went to the root of the controversy and required proper examination, the first appellate order was set aside and the matter was restored for fresh adjudication after due opportunity to the assessee and consideration of the material produced. The delay of 66 days was condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate order should be set aside and the matter restored for fresh adjudication after consideration of the assessee's factual submissions concerning the joint development agreement.

Analysis: The appeal was delayed by 66 days, and the delay was condoned. On merits, the assessee contended that the addition relating to capital gains arising from a joint development agreement was made without properly considering the factual position, including the later cancellation of the agreement and the absence of development activity. Since these factual aspects went to the root of the dispute and required proper examination, the order of the first appellate authority was set aside and the matter was restored for a fresh decision after granting due opportunity and considering the material produced.

Conclusion: The matter was remitted to the first appellate authority for de novo consideration in accordance with law.

---