RAJESH KUMAR SHARMA,NOIDA V. ITO 5(2) 2, NOIDA

ITA 1785/DEL/2025

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781533 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Vidarbha Veneere Industries Ltd. vs. ITO (2025) 174 taxmann.com 223 (Bom.), V.S. Chandrashekar vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 273 (Kar.), CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADUMNA KUMAR SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: PREETI GUPTA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 147; 50C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA No. 1785/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Rajesh Kumar Sharma, L-002, Prateek Laurel, Sector-120, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Vs CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ARVPS8765J Assessee by : Ms. Preeti Gupta, CA Revenue by : Sh. Pradumna Kumar Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 02.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1054853837(1) dated 03.08.2023, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. Suffice to say, the sole substantive issue between both the parties which arises from the tribunal’s apt adjudication is that of correctness of the learned lower authorities’ action adding an amount of Rs.21,95,375/- representing the difference between actual purchase price of Rs.33,76,625/- and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1785/Del/2025 Rajesh Kumar Sharma 2 stamp valuation amounting to Rs.55,72,000/- of the assessee’s residential flat purchased in the relevant previous year, assessed in assessment order dated 21.03.2022 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 4. That being the case, we notice that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has itself extracted the corresponding sale/purchase deed executed between the parties in the relevant previous year involving “lease rights” than the prescribed capital asset(s) of “land and building” as per section 56(2)(vii) Explanation (d)(i) of the Act. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the impugned statutory provision is pari materia to section 50C of the Act applicable in case of capital gain arising from sale/transfer of the specified capital asset “land and building” only. Faced with this situation, learned departmental representative quotes Vidarbha Veneere Industries Ltd. vs. ITO (2025) 174 taxmann.com 223 (Bom.) that the impugned statutory provision also could be invoked in sale/transfer of lease rights as well. The assessee on the other hand places strong reliance on V.S. Chandrashekar vs. ACIT (2021) 129 taxmann.com 273 (Kar.) deciding the very issue in his favour. No guidance has admittedly come from hon’ble jurisdictional high court at Delhi. We therefore quote CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) that in such an instance of conflicting hon’ble non-jurisdictional high courts’ Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1785/Del/2025 Rajesh Kumar Sharma 3 decisions, a view which favours the assessee ought to be adopted and delete the impugned section 56(2)(vii) addition herein amounting to Rs.21,95,375/- in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 5. All other pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 29/09/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "