This case examines the appeal by Vikram Bajaj against the decision of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – 3, New Delhi. The dispute centers on the revision under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, related to the assessment year 2017-18, particularly concerning the earnings from the sale of immovable property.
Vikram Bajaj filed a return for the AY 2017-18, which was later subjected to scrutiny following a search and seizure operation. The primary issue was the assessment of income from the sale of a property allegedly underreported, involving on-money receipts.
The assessing officer initially made additions on a protective basis, which were later contested in the Settlement Commission. The Commission ruled in favor of the assessee, stating the property was owned by RNB Mercantile Pvt. Ltd and not by Vikram Bajaj personally, thus no personal gain was realized from the transactions.
The Tribunal sided with the assessee, highlighting that the transactions were already considered and settled under the aegis of the Settlement Commission, and thus, no further adjustments were warranted. The decision stresses the importance of the judicial understanding of ownership and beneficial interest in property transactions under tax law.
The case underscores the complexities of property ownership and capital gains tax implications in corporate structures. It also illustrates the critical role of the Settlement Commission in resolving tax disputes, providing a finality to contentious issues. This case sets a precedent for similar cases where corporate entities act through nominees in property transactions.
ITA 552/DEL/2021: Vikram Bajaj vs Pr.CIT(Central) – 3, New Delhi
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform