2025 (2) TMI 1673

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(A)" u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("Act"), your appellant prefers this appeal, among others, on the following grounds of appeal, each of which is without prejudice to, and independent of, the other: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the order u/s. 144 r. w. s. 147 dated 09.12.2019 is bad in law in as much as no Document Identification No. (DIN) is mentioned in the said order as per mandate of CBDT's Circular No.19 of 2019. The appellant, therefore, prays that the impugned assessment order be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the Ld. AO to charge tax on long term capital gain of Rs. 30,00,000/- allegedly ea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me. Thus the assessee received of Rs. 70.00 lacs as compensation from builder against surrender of his tenancy rights. 3.1 The assessee submitted that, he purchased a property for Rs. 40.00 lacs from the said compensation. He further submitted documentation to prove the source of income for property purchased at Rs. 40.00 lacs during the year under consideration 3.2 The Ld.CIT(A) on going through the submissions of the assessee observed and held as under : "4.2. Aggrieved with the order, the assessee instituted the present appeal, where the only Ground taken was against the treatment of Rs. 40,00,000/- as Unexplained Investment, as concluded by the AO in the assessment order. 4.3. During the appeal proceedings, the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,00,000/- was made to the said seller was made on 03/04/2012 from the Page 4 of 5 AQMPP5085A- SANTOSH MOHAN PATOLE A.Y. 2013-14 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069138130(1) same bank account. The assessee submitted that he got his purchase registered on 27/04/2012. Therefore, apparently, the source of the investment was explained. Having said so, it is seen that the assessee received compensation in lieu of his Tenancy Right for a sum of Rs. 70,00,000/-. Therefore, in terms of Sec. 55(2)(a), as Cost of Acquisition for Tenancy Rights is to be taken as NIL, the entire receipt of Rs. 70,00,000/- became the Capital Gain of the assessee. Since the Tenancy Right was held by the assessee since 1989, the said Capital Gain is to be considered as Long Term ....