Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has allowed the exemption merely relying upon the decision of the co-owner without verifying the distinguishing facts recorded by the Assessing Officer. The matter was restored to him for decision afresh. (AY. 2016-17)
ITO v. Nitinbhai Kanubhai Patel. (2025) 215 ITD 565 (Ahd) (Trib.)
S. 54B: Capital gains-Land used for agricultural purposes-Co-owner-Order of CIT(A), merely relying upon the decision of the co-owner without verifying distinguishing facts recorded by the Assessing Officer, was set aside and restored to him for decision afresh.[S. 45]
Leave a Reply