vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,o a Jh jkBkMs dey's k t;UrHkkbZ] y[s kk lnL; d s le{k

0 BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy l-a@ITA No. 427/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mishri Lal cuke Income Tax Officer, 129 Satguru Colony, Gate No. 1, Vs. Ward-1(2), Ajmer Ajay Nagar, Ajmer LFkk;h y[s kk l-a@thvkbvZ kj l-a@PAN/GIR No.: AHOPL9005H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj l@s Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sogani, CA jktLo dh vksj l@s Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 23/06/2025 mn?kk"s k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 04/07/2025 vkn's k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arise out of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -2, Chennai [ for short CIT(A) ] dated 11/03/2025 in the matter of an assessment order dated 28.11.2019 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] by ITO, Ward 1(2), Ajmer [

for short AO].

2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following ground: -

1. That the learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in allowing relief under section 54 of the IT Act, 1961.

3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that as per information available on record it was noticed that during the year under consideration the assessee sold immovable property along with four other persons situated at AMC No. 467/23 23/647431-A/30 for consideration of Rs. 27,00,000/-. The sub Registrar adopted the value at Rs. 37,03,636/- for stamp purposes the assessee has not filed the return. Accordingly notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 26/03/2019 after taking appropriate approval from competent authority. The above notice was sent through speed post. In response to notice u/s 148, assessee filed return on 02/09/2019 declaring total income of Rs. 3,53,350/-. Accordingly the reasons recorded u/s 147/148 was also provided through e-mail on 02/09/2019. Notice u/s 143(2)& 142(1) along with query letter was issued online. In response to these notices the assessee filed reply. Record reveals that during the year under consideration the assessee has sold 4 properties for total consideration of Rs. 77 lacs for which the sub-registrar adopted the value at Rs. 94,34,997/-. The assessee has declared 15th share and shown capital gain of Rs. 7,02,332/. The assessee has further claimed deduction u/s 54F of Rs. 4,09,415/-, Thereby shown taxable capital gain at Rs 2,92,917/-. The assessee was asked to furnish the details and evidence of the above capital gain which was furnished. After examination of details filed return income was accepted by the ld. AO.

As is evident from the record that the assessee has filed his Return of income making a claim under section 54F of the Act. On realizing that the claim was under wrong section the assessee vide letter dated 16.09.2019 and 28.11.2019 requested ld. AO to allow the claim under the correct section which was section 54 of the Act. The ld. AO did not discussed the same in the assessment order and proceeded what has been submitted by the assessee in the ITR filed.

4. Feeling dissatisfied with that order of assessment, the assessee preferred the present appeal raising there in solitary ground to allow the correct deduction as claimed while in the assessment proceeding. On this issue the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is as under :

“4. Decision:

4.1 The Assessing officer has brought out clearly in the Assessment Order that the Appellant/ Assessee had shown taxable capital gain of Rs.7,02,332/- and further claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Act of Rs. 4,05,419/- in the Return of Income filed in response to Notice u/s 148 of the Act. The Assessment has been completed by accepting the Returned Income.

4.2 The Appellant has stated that he has made a r