2024 (10) TMI 84

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Learned National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, 'the Ld.AO') order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B)of the Act, date of order 13/04/2021. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: - "ADDITION OF RS 54,08,000/- US, 56(2)(x) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as "the CIT(A)"] erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 54,08,000/- under section 56(2)(x) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] being 50% of the stamp duty valuation in respect of the tenancy ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arika Estate Development Pvt Ltd, the landlord and Mr. Pankaj Ochhavlal Modi, the outgoing tenant with a monthly rent amount of Rs. 700/- per month for the property at Room No.10, Floor 3, 138A, Tabela Chawl, CP Tank, Mumbai-400 004. The said agreement was duly registered, and the stamp duty value was ascertained amount to Rs. 1,08,16,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed with an addition of 50% of the stamp duty value for contravening provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Act amount to Rs. 54,08,000/-. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A), considering the submission of the assessee dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved on the appeal order, the assessee filed an appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, learned Counsel for the Revenue, states that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Atul G. Puranik (supra). Thus, it could be inferred that it has been accepted. Our Court in DIT v. Credit Agricole Indosuez (2015) 377 ITR 102/120161.69 pxmmm.com.255 (Dom) (dealing with Tribunal order) and the Apex Court in UOI v. Satish P. Shah [20011 249 ITR 221/117 Taxman 373 (SC) (dealing with High Court order) has laid down the salutary principle that where the Revenue has accepted the decision of the Court/Tribunal o an issue of law and not challenged it in appeal, then a subsequent decision following the earlier decision cannot be challenged. Further, it is not the Revenue's case before us ....