https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796679 Section 56(2)(vii)(b) did not apply to an HUF where the sale agreement, patta and encumbrance certificate showed that its Karta acquired the immovable property in an individual capacity. The existing reassessment record was merely evaluated by the first appellate authority, so no inadmissible additional evidence was relied upon under Rule 46A. As the Revenue produced no cogent material that the HUF funded the purchase or that the property was an HUF asset, the HUF PAN's inadvertent inclusion in the sale deed did not establish ownership. The addition was deleted. en-us Mon, 03 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Aug 2026 08:32:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796679 Section 56(2)(vii)(b) did not apply to an HUF where the sale agreement, patta and encumbrance certificate showed that its Karta acquired the immovable property in an individual capacity. The existing reassessment record was merely evaluated by the first appellate authority, so no inadmissible additional evidence was relied upon under Rule 46A. As the Revenue produced no cogent material that the HUF funded the purchase or that the property was an HUF asset, the HUF PAN's inadvertent inclusion in the sale deed did not establish ownership. The addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 03 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796679