2019 (12) TMI 1077

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, deriving income from business, filed his return of income for the A.Y 2011-12 on 13.6.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 1,73,400/-. According to the information received by the Department, the assessee has sold two immovable properties vide document No.1993/2010 and 1994/2010 both dated 29.6.2010 during the relevant previous year for a value of Rs. 9,22,000/- each as against the SRO value of Rs. 16,38,000/- each respectively. The AO observed that the SRO value being higher than the sale consideration mentioned in the sales deed, the provisions of section 50C are applicable. Accordingly, a showcause notice was issued to the assessee to which the asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee as well as the additional ground are as under: Regular Grounds: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, Hyderabad is erroneous and bad in law. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, Hyderabad ought not to have dismissed the appeal filed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, Hyderabad erred in upholding the orders passed by the learned Assessing Officer being the ITO- Ward 4(3), Hyderabad determining the normal income of the appellant at Rs. 2,65,400/- and Long-Term Capital gains at Rs. 20,87,555/-by ....