TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1320
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw, the learned CIT(A) has erred in allowing the assessee's appeal without discussing the issues on merits. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in treating the notice issued under section 148 of the Act as invalid and quashing the subsequent assessment order solely on the ground that the said notice was issued by the JAO instead of the FAO, without taking into account the newly inserted provision of section 147A of the Income-tax Act with effect from 01.04.2021, which clarifies that the Assessing Officer for the purposes of sections 148 and 148A shall mean and shall always be deemed to have meant an Assessing Officer other than the National Faceless Assessment Centre or any assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce he was the earning member of the family eligible to obtain a housing loan and had accordingly availed a loan of Rs.25,00,000 from Bassein Catholic Co-operative Bank Ltd. It was further submitted that Rs.50,00,000 had been paid by his maternal grandmother before registration of the agreement. 4. The Assessing Officer observed that the stated purchase consideration of the property was Rs.81,00,000, whereas the assessee had explained only the housing loan of Rs.25,00,000 and payment of Rs.50,00,000 made by his maternal grandmother. He, therefore, held that the source of the balance amount of Rs.6,00,000 remained unexplained and added the same under section 69 read with section 115BBE. The Assessing Officer further noticed that the stamp-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and registration charges. It was submitted that the banking payments of Rs.59,00,000, together with the housing loan of Rs.25,00,000, accounted for the aggregate amount of Rs.84,00,000 paid to the builder. The delay in producing the old banking records was attributed to the death of the assessee's maternal grandmother and the difficulty experienced by the family in retrieving the documents pertaining to an old transaction. 7. As regards the addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), it was submitted that though the consideration initially recorded in the agreement was Rs.81,00,000, certain further payments were demanded by the builder and the aggregate amount ultimately paid towards the property was Rs.84,00,000. Therefore, the difference....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld not have allowed the assessee's appeal in its entirety. The learned DR also relied upon the exception contained in paragraph 3.1(b) of CBDT Circular No. 5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 to support the maintainability of the present appeal despite the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit. 10. After considering the relevant material placed on record, we find that though the learned CIT(A) has quashed the reassessment on the jurisdictional ground relating to the authority which issued the notice under section 148, the assessee had challenged the additions on merits as well and the relevant documentary material forms part of the record. Since, upon examination of such material, we find that the additions themselves are unsustainab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ank account and an institutional housing loan. The Assessing Officer has not pointed out any infirmity in the bank entries or the loan documents, nor has any material been brought on record to demonstrate that any part of the investment had emanated from an undisclosed source belonging to the assessee. 13. It is also important to bear in mind that the property was not purchased by the assessee alone. It was jointly acquired with his mother and maternal grandmother, and the material available in the assessment record itself records the payment of Rs.50,00,000 by the latter. Yet, while examining the alleged shortfall, the Assessing Officer proceeded as though the entire property and its consideration represented an investment made exclusiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded in the agreement, further amounts were demanded and received by the builder and the aggregate payment made towards the property was Rs.84,00,000. These payments are not founded upon an unsubstantiated plea but are reflected in the banking records. Therefore, while examining the applicability of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), the actual and documented consideration paid for acquiring the property could not have been disregarded merely because the agreement initially mentioned the consideration at Rs.81,00,000. 16. Once the aggregate consideration of Rs.84,00,000 is taken into account, the difference vis-à-vis the stamp-duty value of Rs.84,88,000 is only Rs.88,000. More importantly, the property was admittedly acquired by three join....