TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isions of the said section, wherein, the Agreement for the purchase of the residential flat was registered on 23/02/2017. 3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in making the addition of Rs. 47,74,681/- under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the premise that the Appellant has failed to prove that the entire consideration was paid by the Appellants spouse. 4) That the Assessing Officer has misdirected himself or has routinely initiated proceedings under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as underreporting of income, where, in fact, the purported underreporting is a matter of incorrect application of law and thus devoid of merits and contrary to law and needs to be quashed and prayed for accordingly. 5) The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/or delete any/all of the above grounds of Appeal before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal." 2. Brief facts of the case are as under:- The assessee had not filed any return of income for the year under consideration as she is a home-maker. However, based on information passed through the In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....consent terms, the builder agreed to sell another residential flat in the same premises for the same amount of Rs. 46,13,238/-,in different wing being C-wing having ad-measuring area of 649.27 sq.ft. As per the consent terms, assessee was only required to pay the balance Rs. 15,63,238/- to the builder having regard to the fact that Rs. 30,50,000/- was already paid which duly acknowledged by the builder before the Consumer Commission. 2.5. The Ld.AO, however, was of the opinion that just because the consideration is paid according to the direction of the Consumer Court the transaction would not become tax-free for adopting the stamp duty value for the entire year. The Ld.AO thus, called upon the assessee to explain as to why provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act is not applicable to the differential amount of the stamp duty valuation and the agreement value of the immovable property. The Ld.AO after considering various submissions of assessee observed and held as under:- "6. According to the sale agreement dated.08.09.2010, the assessee and her spouse Shri.Subhash Narayan Anbhavane (herein after called parties) were agreed to acquire the flat no.901, admeasuring....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the addition. The law has provided that such differences are covered u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the IT Act. 2. The assessee has explained that she is a housewife and has no source of income and that her name was included by her spouse in the purchase of the said property without any contribution by the assessee. The entire purchase contribution as regards the said property was met by the assessee's husband. 3. For the sake of good order, the assessee is annexing the Order of her husband u/s 148A(d) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the same property and the same difference of Rs. 95,49,361/marked as Annexure 1. The said Order passed by an Officer of the Income Tax department has taken note of the husband's contribution towards the said property and based on the facts has judiciously dropped the proceeding u/s 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 4. There is nothing to doubt from the Order u/s 148A(d) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 passed in case of the assessee's husband that he himself has contributed to the purchase of the property and is covered by the proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 which reads as Provided that wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom Other Sources". Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A). 3. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee by holding that assessee failed to prove that the entire consideration was paid by her spouse. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that, assessee has filed application seeking admission of following additional ground:- "1. The hearing of the captioned appeal is fixed before Your Honours on January 13, 2026. In this connection, I humbly submit the following: 2. During the conference, the Counsel suggested to me to raise an additional ground, attached herewith as "Annexure -A", challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in invoking provisions of section 147 of the Act. 3. It is submitted that the Additional Ground of Appeal is a legal plea and does not require any investigation of new facts. The additional ground strikes at the root of the matter. 4. I respectfully submit that, as per the settled legal position, the Hon'ble Tribunal has powers to admit additional grounds of appeal." 4.1. The L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case did not contribute to the purchase of the property and the entire sale consideration was paid by her spouse to the builder. The breakup of the part sale consideration paid by assessee's spouse to the builder in respect of the original flat in A-wing is furnished at page104of the paperbook.Ld.AR submitted that assessee's husband had made these payments through three banks being Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cosmos Bank Ltd. and Axis Bank and a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- was paid by cash on various dates starting from 13/03/2009 till 26/02/2010.He submitted that, assessee cannot be held liable in respect of the agreement entered into by her husband with the builder merely because assessee is a joint name holder. 6.2. Without prejudice, Ld.AR on the issue raised in additional grounds, submitted that, the entire differential value between the stamp duty valuation and the agreement value cannot be added in hands of assessee as assessee is 50% owner of the immovable property so purchased which is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. He thus, submitted that, the Competent Authority who was required to approve the re-opening of assessment would be as per Section151 of the Act. It is the su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... -DO- -DO- 458494 10,00,000 3 3. 02/03/2010 -DO- -DO- 458496 1,50,000 4 4. 10/02/2017 -DO- -DO- RTGS 15,63,238 5 5. CASH -DO- 4,50,000 TOTAL PAYMENTS 34,13,238 B PAYMENTS MADE BY SWAPNAL SUBHASH ANMBHAVANE 6. 13/03/2009 AXIX BANK 124010100256032 432797 4,50,000 6 7. 05/08/2009 -DO- -DO- 550301 3,50,000 7 8. 02/03/2010 -DO- -DO- 550318 1,00,000 8 9. 25/11/2009 COSMOS 012100108150 572673 3,00,000 11 TOTAL PAYMENTS 12,00,000 GRANT TOTAL A + B 46,13,238 6.6. The Ld.AR submitted that, assessee was a joint-owner and had not contributed anything towards the purchase of the property, cannot lead to the concl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcumstances, we hereby quash and set aside the order dated 31 March 2023 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, because in our opinion, it is not a fit case for reopening the assessment in the case of Petitioner." We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 7. This Tribunal has analysed in the present facts of the case, the issue that was questioned by the authorities below regarding the source of funds made by assessee's husband towards advances for purchase of immovable property amounting to Rs. 30,50,000/- based on the bank statement furnished by the Ld.AR. The Ld.AR was asked to furnish reconciliation of the payments made through the banks to the builder which has been furnished and reproduced hereinabove. 7.1. Based on the above facts and the view taken by Hon'ble Bombay High Court under identical circumstances in the case of another assessee reproduced hereinabove, we do not find any reason to uphold the order passed by Ld.CIT(A).The source of the advance paid by assessee's husband categorically stands explained hereinabove from the reconciliation statement filed by Ld.AR before this Tribunal. In any event, the Ld.AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notice u/s. 148A(b) is based was provided to the assessee vide ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1043249940(1) dtd. 30/05/2022, asking him to show-cause in accordance with section 148A(b) as to why notice u/s 148 should not be issued with reference to the information as provided. The assessee was requested to furnish explanation along-with supporting document/evidence within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the above- mentioned notice. 4. The Gist of income escaped as per original notice u/s. 148 A of the I.T .: In this case, information was received on 25.03.2019 via email from the I & CI, Enclosed: Refer to attachment ABXPA0486A_2017_ATTACHMENT_100050003883.pdf Note: If digitally signed, the date of digital signature may be taken as date of document. ROOM NO:624,6th Floor, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAHARISHI KARVE ROAD, MUMBAI, Maharashtra, 400020 Email: [email protected], Office Phone:02222001297 filina anur in to www incometax.gov.in. 20 ABXPA0486A- SUBHASH NARAYAN ANBHAVANE A.Y. 2017-18 ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044044686(1) Mumbai. As per the information the assessee has purchased immovableproperty for Rs. 46,13,239/- whereas the stamp duty valuation of t....