TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1019
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer (for short, "AO") under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), dated 02/11/2019. The assessee has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds of appeal: "1. The learned CIT(A) erred in both law and on facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to provide proper opportunity for hearing and for filing further evidence. 3. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the substitution of actual sale consideration by the SRO value u/s. 50C of the Act, without any evidence that the consideration received by the assessee was understated or the transaction was not genuine. 4. The learned CIT (A) ought to have referred the matt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act. Notice under section 148 of the act, dated 27/03/2019, was issued and served upon the assessee. 4. In response, the assessee filed his return of income for AY 2012-13 on 24/09/2019 declaring an income of Rs. 19,50,990/-, wherein he had admitted "capital gains" of Rs. 9,84,649/- after deducting, viz., (i) indexed cost of acquisition: Rs. 4,05,605/-; and (ii) indexed cost of improvement: Rs. 11,39,746/- on his share of capital gains. 5. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that, as per section 50C of the Act, no deduction of indexed cost of improvement was allowable. Accordingly, the AO called upon the assessee to explain as to why his claim for deduction of indexed cost of improvement of Rs. 11,39,746/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the indexed cost of improvement Rs. 11,39,746/- claimed by the assessee was not allowable as per section 50C of the Act, thus, disallowed the same and made an addition of the said amount to the income returned by the assessee in response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), but without success. 8. The assessee, aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 9. Shri VVS Ankith, Advocate, Learned Authorised Representative (for short, "Ld. AR") for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the same involves a delay of 63 days. Elaborating on the reasons leading to the delay,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ward-2, Ambikapur in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31st January, 2025. The Hon'ble Apex Court, while setting aside the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, which had approved the declining of the condonation of the delay of 166 days by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, had observed that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted while considering the application filed by an appellant seeking condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal. 12. On merits, the Ld. AR reiterated the submissions and the contentions made before the AO and the CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) had erred in law and facts of the case while upholding the addition and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of income filed on 29/06/2013. We say so, for the reason that pursuant to the notice issued by the AO under section 148 of the Act, dated 27/03/2019, the previous under-assessment of the income of the assessee qua the "Long term capital gain" (LTCG) arising on the transfer of the aforementioned property was set aside, as a result whereof the assessee in his return of income filed in response to the aforesaid notice issued under section 148 of the Act, dated 27/03/2019 remained well within his right to raise a claim for deduction of the cost of construction of the property while computing the "Long term capital gain" (LTCG) arising on the subject sale transaction. Our aforesaid view that the assessee, pursuant to notice under section 148 of....