Kuldip Kumar Goel Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
The ITAT Delhi partly allowed the assessee’s appeal in a reassessment case relating to sale of immovable property where the AO had disallowed 50% of the claimed cost of improvement (₹44.05 lakh) while computing capital gains. The Tribunal upheld the validity of reopening u/s 147, noting that fresh tangible material such as AIR data regarding property sale and non-response to notices justified formation of “reason to believe” and reopening was not a mere change of opinion. Jurisdictional and procedural objections were also rejected.
However, on merits, the Tribunal found that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)’s decision were ex-parte and the CIT(A) had not passed a proper speaking order as required u/s 250(6). Since the issue of allowability of improvement cost was not properly adjudicated, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh decision after granting opportunity to the assessee to furnish documentary evidence within 60 days. Accordingly, the appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee /appellant against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] dated 19.03.2025 for the A.Y. 2012-13 wherein the appeal was dismissed and the addition made by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) was confirmed.
