TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1529
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. The learned Commissioner of Income tax Appeals erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 13138500 made by the Assessing Officer under section 56(2)(x) of the Income tax Act 1961 which is unjustified arbitrary and bad in law. 2. The learned CIT A failed to properly appreciate the facts evidences and detailed submissions placed on record by the appellant while passing the impugned appellate order. 3. The addition confirmed by the learned CIT A is contrary to the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Income tax Act 1961 and settled judicial precedents applicable to the facts of the appellants case thereby violating the principles....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Ld. AO the stamp duty value of the property was Rs. 2,34,10,500/- and after duly considering the assessee's submission the Ld. AO passed the assessment order dated 08.04.2021 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) r.w.s. 143(3B) of the Act determining the total income at Rs. 1,33,90,000/- after making an addition of Rs. 1,31,38,500/- towards the difference in the value between the purchase consideration and the stamp value determined by the Ld. AO to be income from other sources u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority who vide order dated 11.11.2025 upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO rejecting the assessee's contention that the assessee has received the allotment letter for the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. AR relied on a catena of decisions in support of his contention and had filed additional evidences to substantiate the payment made by the assessee's wife towards purchase of the said property and prayed that the same be admitted in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1964 ("the Rules, 1964" for short). 7. The Learned Departmental Representative ("Ld. DR" for short), on the other hand, controverted the said fact and contended that the allotment letter relied upon by the assessee is not akin to that of an agreement and since the assessee did not have a sale agreement executed in F.Y. 2013-14 the lower authorities were right in determining the stamp value on the date of registration of the sale deed. The Ld. D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of 6th Floor Slab 5.50% 7. On completion of 10th Floor Slab 5.50% 8. On completion of 14th Floor Slab 5.50% 9. On completion of 18th Floor Slab 5.50% 10. On completion of 22nd Floor Slab 5.50% 11. On completion of 26th Floor Slab 5.50% 12 On completion of 30th Floor Slab 5.50% 13. On completion of 34th Floor Slab 5.50% 14. On completion of 34th Floor Slab 5.50% 15 On Possession 5% 9. Subsequent to the commencement of the construction work the assessee had made substantial payments through banking channels which details are summarized at page no.50 of the paper book. The Ld. AR brought our attention to the MOU dated 20/03/2013 between Good Value Financial ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mined is whether the allotment letter given to the assessee by the builder dated 08.05.2013 can be treated as an agreement fixing the amount of consideration for the transfer of immovable property as per the proviso to section 56(2)(x)(b) of the Act. For taking benefit of the provision, wherein a case where the date of agreement and the date of registration are not the same then the stamp duty value on the date of agreement may be taken for the purpose of determining the valuation provided the same shall apply only when the consideration or part consideration has been made by the assessee by any mode other than cash on or before the date of agreement for the transfer of such immovable property. For this purpose, it is pertinent to read thro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ach etc. to establish the fact that the allotment letter is not a mere tentative offer but reads like a complete sale agreement backed by payments made through banking channel. We also draw support from the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Sulochana Saijan Modi vs. ITO (2023) 152 taxmann.com 56 (Mum - Trib.) wherein it was held that the stamp duty valuation has to be determined as on date of the allotment letter for the purpose of section 56(2)(x) of the Act thereby treating the allotment letter to be akin to that of an "agreement to sell". Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the proviso to section 56(2)(x) of the Act inserted by Finance Act, 2017 is applicable in the present case and deem it fit to restore this....