IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year : 2013-14)

Udaykumar Vyas, ITO, Ward – 1(5)

Flat No. 402, Lepresting vs Nagpur Apartment, Plot No. 105-

106, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur.

PAN : AARPV 4578 K Assessee Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sameer Wazalwar, CA Revenue by : Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR Date of hearing : 24.02.2026 Date of pronouncement : 21.04.2026

O R D E R

PER KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, dated 11/03/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, dated 26.12.2019 by the ITO, Ward-1(5), Nagpur for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) and AO failed to appreciate the fact that the appellant is regularly engaged in the business of purchasing and selling land for profit, to which the provisions of section 50C is not applicable.

2. Without prejudice to above, the computation of capital gain done by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) is incorrect, since while calculating the capital gain on sale of land to M/s Vedbhumi Builders, the cost of acquisition of different land is deducted from the sale price.

3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.

3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of land development and plot trading, filed his return of income for AY 2013-14 declaring total income of Rs. 76,13,940/- furnished on 29.08.2019. On the basis of the information received by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) that assessee along with Shri Karemore executed sale deed on 31.12.2012 for a market value of Rs. 9,21,00,000/-. Shri Karemore was given irrecoverable Power of Attorney (POA) to the assessee. The assessee executed an oral agreement with sale with the owner of the land on 21.02.2006. Moreover, sale deed was executed on 10.07.2009 and the indexed cost of the said property was valued at Rs. 96,30,310/-, in which assessee’s share comes to Rs. 48,15,155/-. Thus, long term capital gain is estimated to Rs. 4,12,37,845/- after deducting indexed cost of acquisition. Therefore, Ld. AO has reason to believe that the capital of Rs. 4,12,37,845/- has escaped assessment. Hence, case was reopened and notice u/s. 148 was issued and served upon the assessee. In reply, assessee requested the Ld. AO to treat the original return of income filed u/s. 139 as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) & 142(1) were issued and asked the assessee to upload various details in ITBA portal, which had not done by the assessee. As per the information available on records, Ld. AO invoking section 50C computed the LTCG at Rs. 4,43,34,000/- after deducting indexed cost of acquisition and asked the assessee to explain, by issuing show- cause notice, as to why the said amount should not be added to the total income as income from LTCG. In response to show-cause notice, assessee submitted that assessee and Shri Jagdish Karemore entered into a development agreement on 04/05/2002 with the Nakade family for land development as a business venture, not investment. Out of the total land, 1.77 hectares was sold to Vedbhumi Builders via sale deed dated 18/01/2013. The assessee acted as a consenting party (through development rights/POA) and received consideration. The land constitutes stock-in-trade, and the assessee is regularly engaged in land trading business. Income from this transaction was rightly offered as business income in A.Y. 2013–14, with sale and proportionate cost reflected in the P&L account. Hence, Section 50C and capital gains provisions are not applica