Itxa/1109/2018 Of Devdatta Chandrakant Patil v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Ors
High Court
07 Feb 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1109/2018 Of Devdatta Chandrakant Patil v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Ors
Date of order
07 Feb 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1109/2018 Of Devdatta Chandrakant Patil v. Income Tax Officer And 2 Ors, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
Digitally signedby PURTIPURTIPRASADPRASADPARABDate: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYPARAB2024.02.1312:11:17+0530ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1109 OF 2018
Devdatta Chandrakant Patil….Appellant
V/s.Income Tax Officer and Ors.…Respondents
----
Mr. Jatindra C. Patil for Appellant.Ms. Samiksha Kanani a/w Prasanna Pawar for Respondent
----
CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED : 7[th] FEBRUARY 2024
P.C. :
1.Appellant is impugning an order pronounced on 17[th] May 2017passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in an appeal that wasfiled by appellant. Appellant was aggrieved by an order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Thane [CIT(A)] on 31[st] May2016 by which the CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) hadincorrectly observed that the provisions of Section 50C of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (the Act) would be applicable. The CIT(A) had directed the A.O.to recompute the capital gain by taking the actual sale considerationreceived by assessee and not on the basis of value determined by the StampValuation Authority. The CIT(A) also directed the A.O. to allow all theexpenditures which has been incurred by assessee for selling the plot whilecomputing capital gains in the hands of assessee. Even though it was onlyan order of remand to recompute the capital gains, it is assessee’s case that
no capital gain in fact is payable. Therefore, assessee had filed an appealand the ITAT dismissed the appeal.
2.Since the matter has been remanded to the A.O., we woulddirect the A.O. to hear assessee, consider the submissions made by assesseeincluding the statement that no capital gain is payable and not just simplywork out the capital gains. The A.O. may pass such order as he deems fitin accordance with law but shall also deal with the submissions of assessee
on merits as to why capital gain was not payable.
3.Appeal accordingly disposed.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)
(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.