{"id":55951,"date":"2025-08-16T10:28:03","date_gmt":"2025-08-16T04:58:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025-303-taxman-408-sc-editorial-pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025171-taxmann-com-51-madhc\/"},"modified":"2025-08-16T10:28:03","modified_gmt":"2025-08-16T04:58:03","slug":"pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025-303-taxman-408-sc-editorial-pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025171-taxmann-com-51-madhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025-303-taxman-408-sc-editorial-pcit-v-k-r-jayaram-2025171-taxmann-com-51-madhc\/","title":{"rendered":"PCIT v. K.R. Jayaram (2025) 303 Taxman 408 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. K.R. Jayaram (2025)171 taxmann.com 51 (Mad)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee is\u00a0 engaged in real-estate business.\u00a0 He filed his return of income which was accepted and assessment was completed.\u00a0 Subsequently, the assessment was reopened on ground that assessee should have adopted value of land computed by District Revenue Officer under Indian Stamp Act for purpose of computation of stamp duty payable on such instrument. The Assessment was reopened. On appeal the CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Tribunal\u00a0 held that there was no material available with the Assessing Officer other than what was available with him at the first instance, when he completed the assessment under section 143(3) to come to a conclusion that there were reasons to reopen the assessment. On appeal the High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal on the ground that \u00a0based on very same document re assessment was not justified. Special leave petition filed against impugned order of High Court was\u00a0 dismissed on ground of low tax effect. \u00a0(AY. 2009-10)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147 : Reassessment   Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal on the ground that  based on very same document re assessment was not justified-Special leave petition filed against the  order of High Court was  dismissed on ground of low tax effect. [S. 50C, 148, Art. 136]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-55951","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-eyr","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55951","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=55951"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55951\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":55952,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55951\/revisions\/55952"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55951"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55951"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55951"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}