PARAS RAMLAL JAISWAR ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD-42(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 5935/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Paras Ramlal Jaiswar, against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which confirmed an addition to the assessee's income under section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was based on the difference between the purchase consideration and the stamp duty value of a property purchased jointly with his wife. The Tribunal noted that a subsequent valuation report from the Valuation Officer accepted the transaction value declared by the assessee, leading to the decision to remit the matter back to the AO for re-assessment in light of the new evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787997 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Wealth Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G.J. NINAWE
• Assessee Lawyers: DEVENDRA JAIN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice; Valuation report
• Section: 56

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5935/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Paras Ramlal Jaiswar, Flat No.4, Parijat Bldg, Pandey Nagar, Raval Pada, Dahisar East, Maharashtra-400068. PAN : AFDPJ3068H vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-42(1)(4), Room No. 736, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Devendra Jain For Revenue : Shri G.J. Ninawe, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 27-11-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27-11-2025 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 14-05-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19, wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned, Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition under section 56(2)(x) treating difference between Purchase Consideration and Stamp Duty Value as income and making addition of Rs. 3,40,412/- to the total Income of the appellant disregarding the factual and legal matrix of the case. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 5935/Mum/2025 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), CIT (Appeals), has erred in passing an order without considering the Valuation Officer's Order dated 28.02.2024. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), CIT (Appeals), has erred in passing an order not considering on merit the documents submitted by the appellant thereby grossly violating the principles of Natural Justice. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), CIT (Appeals), Mumbai has erred in not providing personal hearing to the appellant thereby grossly violating the principles of Natural Justice.” 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the appeal as pointed out by the Registry. After hearing both the parties and perusing the affidavit placed on record the contents of which have not been rebutted by the Revenue, we find that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the present appeal and hence, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee has purchased a property jointly with his wife for a transaction value of Rs. 45 lakhs, having stamp duty value of Rs. 51,80,824/-. During the course of assessment proceedings after calling for the necessary information and documentation, the amount of Rs. 3,40,412/- being the assessee‟s share in the differential amount between transaction value and the stamp duty value, was brought to tax as „income from other sources‟ u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟). Separately the matter was also referred to DVO and since the DOV‟s report had not come, the assessment proceedings were completed leaving open the matter relating to rectification, if required after receipt of the report from the DVO. Accordingly, as against the returned income of Rs. 12,22,560/-, the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 5935/Mum/2025 assessed income was determined at Rs. 15,62,972/- by making an addition of Rs. 3,40,412/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act. 4. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has sustained the addition so made by the AO and against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that valuation report has since been issued by the Valuation Officer vide his order u/s. 56 of the Income tax Act r.w.s. 16A(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, dt. 28-02- 2024, wherein the Valuation Officer has accepted the valuation of Rs. 45 lakhs, being the transaction value as declared by the assessee. It was accordingly submitted that addition so made and sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) be directed to be deleted in light of the acceptance of the transaction value by the Valuation Officer. 6. The Ld.DR has been heard, who has relied on the findings and the orders of the lower authorities. At the same time, it was submitted that since the valuation report has come subsequent to the passing of the assessment order, the matter may be remitted to the file of the AO for necessary verification. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. During the course of assessment proceedings, the matter was referred to Valuation Officer. However, pending the receipt of the valuation report, the assessment was completed, wherein differential amount between transaction value and stamp duty value was brought to tax in the hands of the assessee to the extent of his share in the property. However, subsequently, the valuation report has since been submitted by Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 5935/Mum/2025 the valuation officer and a copy of the valuation report has been placed on record by the Ld.AR, wherein the Valuation Officer vide his order dt. 28-02-2024 has determined the value of the property at Rs. 45 lakhs as declared by the assessee. We, therefore, find merit in the contention of the Ld. AR and remit the matter to the file of the AO to take into consideration the valuation report so submitted by the Valuation Officer and grant the necessary relief to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27-11-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG) PRESIDENT (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 27-11-2025 TNMM Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "