IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri. Kovvur Chandrashekhar, Vs. DCIT, Near Industrial Estate, DAM Road, Kallahalli, Central Circle – 1(1), Ananthashayanagudi, B. O. Bangalore.

Bellary – 583 201.

PAN : AFAPC 4016 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. T. Srinivasa, CA Revenue by : Shri.Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore.

Date of hearing : 19.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2025

O R D E R

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order passed by the learned CIT(A) - 15, Bangalore, vide DIN :ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-

25/1067958580(1) dated 26.08.2024.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case from the Assessment Order are that assessee is a proprietor of M/s. Cargo of India. Assessee has filed his revised return of income under section 139(5) of the Act on 31.05.2017 declaring total income of Rs.34,02,060/-. Return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case was reopened under section 147 of the Act for escaped income chargeable to tax. Subsequently notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 26.03.2021 was issued and served on the assessee. Assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice under section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, show cause notices were issued to the assessee on different dates. In spite of giving opportunities assessee did not file his return of income and another opportunity was given to the assessee before completing assessment under section 144 of the Act. From the information available with the Income Tax Department it was noticed that assessee has sold non agricultural land bearing survey Nos.17/1, 17/4 measuring 5 acres each and survey No.29/6 measuring 14 guntas situated at Kunikeri Village of Koppal Taluk and District on 10.08.2015 for a total consideration of Rs.58,00,000/-. However, as per Sale Deed, the guidance value is Rs.1,50,00,000/- and assessee was given show cause notice as to why guidance value should not be considered for computation of capital gain income as per section 50C of the Act. However, assessee did not make any submission against show cause notice issued. It was verified from the return of income filed by the assessee that sale consideration declared by the assessee was only Rs.58 lakhs. Accordingly assessee opted claiming indexation cost has declared LTCG of Rs.2,67,705/-. However TDS for the above mentioned properties was deducted at Rs.1,50,000/- that was claimed as tax credit. AO applied section 50C of the Act since there was difference between guidance value of the registered property and value offered for computation of capital gain. Accordingly AO made addition of Rs.92 lakhs and completed assessment under section 144 of the Act.

3. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A)after considering the detailed submission observed that AO has rightly applied section 50C of the Act for computing capital gain and rejected all the pleas taken by the assessee.

4. Feeling aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and has filed written submissions which is as under:

1. The appellant most respectfully submit as under:

1.1 That the appellant has filed the subject appeal challenging the order dated 26.08.2024 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 11- Bengaluru. u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 upholding the order of re- assessment dated 28.03.2022 for the assessment year 2016- 17 passed by the learned assessing officer u/s 147 r w s 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961 making an addition of Rs 92,00,000/- under section 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961;

1.2 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

has unjustly rejected the appellant’s claim that the alleged sale was only a transaction of gift