https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770065 ITAT Bangalore allowed the assessee's appeal against addition for suppression of sale consideration. The AO erroneously attributed entire sale consideration of Rs. 4.91 crore to the assessee despite property being jointly owned and sold by four co-owners. The assessee was only a confirming party who received proportionate share of proceeds, which was properly declared in return and reflected in Form 26AS. The AO failed to consider the assessee's responses to notices under section 142(1) containing supporting documents. The addition was deleted as the assessee correctly declared income corresponding to his actual share in the joint transaction. en-us Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 May 2025 09:58:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770065 ITAT Bangalore allowed the assessee's appeal against addition for suppression of sale consideration. The AO erroneously attributed entire sale consideration of Rs. 4.91 crore to the assessee despite property being jointly owned and sold by four co-owners. The assessee was only a confirming party who received proportionate share of proceeds, which was properly declared in return and reflected in Form 26AS. The AO failed to consider the assessee's responses to notices under section 142(1) containing supporting documents. The addition was deleted as the assessee correctly declared income corresponding to his actual share in the joint transaction. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770065