SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 2356

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (KOLKATA BENCH)
SURAJIT GHOSH KOLKATA – Appellant
Versus
ITO WARD - 44(1) KOLKATA KOLKATA – Respondent


आदेश/ORDER

Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2013-14, are directed by the separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, which in turn arise out of the separate two assessment orders passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ( In short, the ‘Act’).

Since, the issues involved in these two appeals are common and identical; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as the facts narrated in ITA No.1644/Kol/2018, for assessment Year 2013-14, have been taken into consideration for deciding the above appeals en masse.

3. The solitary grievance of the assessee, as per lead case in ITA No. 1644/Kol/2018, for A.Y. 2013-14, is that the ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.4,85,77,093/- on account of Long Term capital gain on sale of immovable property, and reference to Departmental Valuation Officer for the Valuation of immovable property as on 01.04.1981 be held to be bad in law.

4. The facts of the case which can be stated quite shortly are as foll

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top