आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद (cid:17)ायपीठ “सी“,अहमदाबाद ।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (cid:22)ी टी.आर. सेti(cid:26)ल कु मार, (cid:17)ाियक सद(cid:28) एवं

(cid:22)ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद(cid:28) के सम"।

]]

BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.264/Ahd/2019 िनधा(cid:15)रण वष(cid:15) /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Mr. Jobanji Thakor The ITO F-40, Abugiri Society बनाम/ Ward-3(2)(2)

v/s.

Tal. Daskroi, Jagatpur Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 382 470 (cid:19)थायी लेखा सं./

PAN: AKNPT 2930 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&’ यथ%/ Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Mehul K. Patel, AR Revenue by : Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19 /02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 26 /02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 28.12.2018, confirming the assessment order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”] under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

Facts of the case:

2. The assessee is an individual, filed his return of income on 20.03.2016, declaring total income of Rs.3,19,670/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS due to the assessee’s sale of immovable property during the year and the discrepancy observed in the capital gain computation. The main reason for scrutiny was that the sale consideration shown in the Income Tax Return (ITR) was lower than the valuation by the Stamp Duty Authority. Consequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 18.09.2017 and served via speed post, with a hearing fixed on 03.10.2017. Subsequently, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with a questionnaire was issued on 27.09.2017, but the same was returned unserved. Another notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 03.11.2017 and served personally, fixing the hearing for 10.11.2017.

2.1. The assessee submitted a written reply on 01.12.2017, along with a copy of the ITR acknowledgment, computation of total income, and supporting documents related to the claim of deductions under Sections 54 and 54B of the Act. Upon verification of records, it was found that the assessee, along with five other co-owners, had sold an immovable property located at Village: Jagatpur, Sub-District: Ahmedabad-13 (City), District: Ahmedabad. The total sale consideration for the property was Rs.8,32,41,800/- and the assessee’s individual share was Rs.2,08,10,450/-. To verify the cost of acquisition, the AO referred the case to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) for determining the fair market value of the land as on 01.04.1981. The DVO’s report dated 26.12.2017 assessed the indexed cost of acquisition of the sold property at Rs.5,96,000/-.

2.2. The AO issued a show-cause notice to the assessee in which the AO sought clarification and justification from the assessee. In the show-cause notice, the AO specifically pointed out that, as per Sale Deed No. 1256/1/67 dated 08.07.2014, the assessee had sold immovable property jointly with five co-owners for a total sale consideration of Rs.8,32,41,800/-. The property was situated at Village Jagatpur, Ahmedabad City. The AO observed that the land sold by the assessee did not qualify as agricultural land but rather fell within the Municipality/AUDA/Corporation limits as per the provisions of Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO held that the land was a capital asset and subject to capital gains tax.

2.3. On verification of the computation of total income furnished by the AR vide letter dated 01.12.2017, the AO noted that the assessee had considered the net sale consideration of his share at Rs.2,