Case Law Details
P. Selvamani Ranjithan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
In the recent case of P. Selvamani Ranjithan Vs ITO at ITAT Chennai, the burden of proving the non-accrual of capital gains was placed on the assessee. The tribunal has ordered for a re-evaluation of the capital gain assessment in the case, stressing on the assessee’s responsibility to establish evidence to substantiate her claims.
The case centers around the sale of a property that the assessee, P. Selvamani Ranjithan, claims did not result in any capital gains due to prior oral agreements and settlements. However, the assessing officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) both held that Ranjithan was the absolute owner of the property at the time of the sale and therefore liable for the assessed capital gains.
In reviewing the matter, the ITAT acknowledged the submissions made by Ranjithan but observed a failure to provide tangible proof. Given the complexity of the transactions involved and in the interest of natural justice, the ITAT has decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The case of P. Selvamani Ranjithan vs ITO underscores the crucial role of the assessee in substantiating their claims, especially in complex cases of capital gain assessments. The onus is on the assessee to present valid evidence to support their stand. This ruling provides an opportunity for the assessee to re-present their case with substantial proof, reinforcing the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the principles of natural justice.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
