TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 719
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079691715(1) dated 18.8.2025 & vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1077790831(1) dated 25.6.2025, all passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "The Act"). Since the issue in all these appeals interrelated, these are clubbed together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience & brevity. 2. We first take quantum appeal in ITA No.3146/Bang/2025 for disposing of these appeals and the grounds raised in this appeal are reproduced below: 10 Grounds of Appeal Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal (see note below) 1. The Learned CIT(A) went wrong in upholding the order of re-assessment made for the assessment year 2016-17. Rs. 24,70,156/- &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was also issued calling for specific details required for completion of the proceeding. However, there was no compliance by the assessee. 3.1 As per data received from the Sub-Registrar, Koppal, the assessee had sold capital asset comprising of 18 sites in the financial year 2015-16 and the registered sale deed for sale consideration was lesser than the stamp value. The AO observed that the total consideration receipt on sale of 18 sites were Rs. 47,56,000/-, whereas the market value of the 18 sites were Rs. 92,37,000/- and hence, there was a difference of Rs. 44,81,000/- between the stamp duty value and the sale consideration declared. 3.2 Further, the AO found that the assessee had received sale consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 21.3.2022, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 5. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the AO had acted within the four corners of the law. The reassessment proceedings were lawfully initiated on the basis of credible intelligence, duly sanctioned and appropriately communicated. The addition u/s 50C of the Act was made on the deemed consideration prescribed by statute. The burden of proof to rebut the same or invoke section 50C(2) of the Act lays squarely on the assessee which the assessee failed to discharge. The later stage assertion that the land constituted business inventory is neither supported by books of accounts nor reflected in return discl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the materials available on record. The contention of the AR of the assessee is that the assessee is into the business of real estate and the land/sites constituted business inventory and therefore, the provision of section 50C of the Act will not be applicable to him. We also take note of the fact that assessee while filing the return of income had disclosed only income from house property & profit from business only and not from the capital gains. Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that the assessee could not represent his case before the AO and therefore the assessee could not produce the relevant details to substantiate his claim that the assessee is into the business of real estate. We are of the considered op....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... directed to produce all the relevant documents/evidences /agreements/land records, etc. along with books of accounts to substantiate his claim that he is into the business of purchase and sale of plots/sites. It is ordered accordingly. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 3147/Bang/2025 (AY 2016-17): 11. In this appeal the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 10 Grounds of Appeal Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal (see note below) 1. The Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for the assessment year 2016-17 on the ground of limitation. Rs. 66,14,000/- 2. The Learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate....