Ashok Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh, allowed the assessee’s appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, for Assessment Year 2013-14 arising from reassessment under Sections 147 read with 144 and 144B of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal first condoned a delay of 30 days in filing the appeal after considering the application for condonation and medical records.
The dispute concerned an addition of ₹78,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer as long-term capital gain on the sale of House No. 804, Phase-3B1, Mohali. The reassessment was initiated after the Department received information that the assessee had sold the property for ₹1,41,00,000 without disclosing any capital gains. The Assessing Officer treated the difference between the purchase consideration of ₹63,00,000 and the sale consideration as taxable capital gains and the CIT(A) sustained the addition.
The assessee contended that the property transaction did not belong to him and that the capital gain had already been disclosed by his cousin, Shri Ravinder Goyal. According to the assessee, Shri Ravinder Goyal had advanced funds to Shri Rajwant Singh, and when repayment failed, an Agreement to Sell and a registered General Power of Attorney were executed in Shri Ravinder Goyal’s favour. Subsequently, the property was registered in the assessee’s name only to secure Shri Ravinder Goyal’s financial interest. The assessee further submitted that civil litigation between the parties ended in a settlement recognising Shri Ravinder Goyal’s rights in the property, and that the entire sale consideration of ₹1,41,00,000 was transferred through banking channels to Shri Ravinder Goyal on the same day. The assessee also asserted that the transaction had already been examined in Shri Ravinder Goyal’s assessment.
