TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 293
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erty was Rs. 1,08,43,500/-. The assessee held a 40% ownership share in the said property. The assessee contended that the property had originally been booked in the year 2012. However, owing to a dispute between the developer and the slum dwellers, the project could not be completed and the agreement for sale was ultimately executed only in the year 2017. Thereafter, a new developer was appointed, who completed the construction of the building. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO invoked the provisions of Section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) of the Act and made an addition of Rs. 30,43,500/-, being the difference between the purchase consideration and the stamp duty valuation. The assessee submitted that the Ld. AO had erred in making the addition of the entire differential amount instead of restricting it to the assessee's 40% ownership share. The assessee further furnished a valuation report in support of the declared consideration and requested that, if the Ld. AO was not inclined to accept the said valuation report, the matter be referred to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) for determination of the fair market value. However, the Ld. AO neither considered the valuation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....u/s. 56(2)(x)(b)(B) of the Act. Thus, the AO passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act on 24.04.2021 at assessed total income of Rs. 43,69,550/- by adding the amount of Rs. 30,43,500/- as income from other sources u/s section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) of 'the Act. Against the order, the appellant preferred appeal u/s 246A of the Act and filed Form 35 on 21.05.2021." The appeal of the assessee partly allowed. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR argued and filed a paper book comprising pages 1 to 88 which has been placed on record. The Ld. AR contended that the date of allotment of the property being Flat No.3102 admeasuring approximately 1016 sq. ft. build up area. In 31st Floor in the building "The Address" was 17.04.2012, whereas allotment letter was duly issued on the same day related to this said property. It was further submitted that the said agreement was subsequently cancelled and the promoter Glorious Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. was duly removed. The new Contractor is duly appointed named Paradigm Ambit Buildcom, who allotted the residential Flat bearing No.404 admeasuring approximately 642 sq. ft. carpet area on 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has paid the parts of consideration as per the terms and conditions of allotment through banking channels prior to the execution of sale agreement therefore, we consider that proviso to section 56(2)(x) should apply to the facts of the present case. Therefore, as per the proviso to section 56(2)(x) as discussed the date of agreement in the case of the assessee will be taken to 18.03.2011 and not 26.04.2016 since it is clearly demonstrated from the relevant supporting material that allotment of the new flat has been made to the assessee in continuation of the replacing of the earlier allotment which was changed because of the unavoidable circumstances of change in the Development Control Regulation. Therefore, we consider that decision of ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition made by the assessing officer is not justified. Accordingly, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed." 5. The Ld. DR on the other hand, relied on the order of revenue authorities. The Ld. DR stated that the assessee had submitted the registered agreement dated 14.08.2017 entered between the assessee and the Paradigm Ambit Buildcon annexed in APB page 48 to 69 where the receipt of payment the first p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... * Confirm if the deed explicitly mentions Mansukh Chimanlal Chauhan (40%), Mrudula Mansukh Chauhan (40%), and Karan Mansukh Chauhan (20%) as joint owners. (ii) Flow of Funds and Payment Verification The core of this adjudication rests on who actually paid the purchase consideration of Rs. 78,00,000/-. The AO is directed to: * Verify the Bank Account Statements of all three co-owners. * Determine if the payments to Paradigm Ambit Buildcom were made proportionately from the independent bank accounts of the wife and son, or if the entire amount was funded by the appellant. * Cross-verify the returned amounts (Rs. 6,50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/-) from the original developer to ensure they were credited back to the respective co-owners' accounts. 6.5.3 The appellant is hereby directed to furnish the following supporting documents before the AO within 15 days of receipt of this order. * Certified copy of the full Purchase Agreement highlighting ownership clauses. * Bank certificates or attested statements clearly marking the source of each instalment paid toward the flat. * Income Tax Returns of the w....