SUPRIYO BAG,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 61(3), KOLKATA

ITA 3003/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Supriyo Bag, the appellant, who contested the addition of Rs.9,98,000 as unexplained income by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The addition was based on the difference between the stamp duty value of a property and its actual transaction amount. The ITAT found that the Assessing Officer incorrectly applied section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act by considering the stamp duty valuation on the date of the agreement to sell rather than the date of the allotment letter, where part of the consideration was paid. The ITAT's decision was influenced by a precedent set in a similar case, favoring the assessee.

• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Kolkata
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Smt. Kajari Banerjee -vs.- Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 130/KOL/2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 3003/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Supriyo Bag 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 3003/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Supriyo Bag,……………………………………..…Appellant 125-B/2, S.N. Roy Road, Behala-700038, Kolkata [PAN:AFOPB4986P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-61(3), Kolkata, Bamboo Villa, Central Revenue Building, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700014 Appearances by: Dr. Somnath Ghosh, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: February 24, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: March 27th, 2026 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.11.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2017-2018. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3003/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Supriyo Bag 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed return of income for the AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs.8,10,230/-. The case of the assessee was selected on the issue that the assessee has bought an immovable property during AY 2017-18, wherein the cost of acquisition is less than the value that was adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority for the purpose of stamp duty. The assessee purchased the immovable property at Rs.28,00,000/-. The stamp value was determined at Rs.37,98,000/-, whereas the transaction amount was Rs.14,00,000/-. The stamp duty value of the property exceeds by an amount of Rs.23,98,000/- from the consideration that was incurred to acquire the said property. The assessee was asked vide notice under section 142(1) dated 18.01.2023 to furnish the details regarding abovementioned reason along with relevant supporting documentary evidence. In response, the assessee filed Form 16, copy of ITR and computation of income, but had not made the full and point wise reply on the queries raised in notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 18.01.2023. Again, the assessee vide notice under section 142(1) dated 22.02.2023 was asked to furnish the details called for in the said notice, but the assessee did not respond. Therefore, ld. Assessing Officer added the difference amount of Rs.9,98,000/- (difference of Rs.37,98,000/- and Rs.28,00,000/-) as unexplained to the total income. Finally, ld. Assessing Officer determined the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.18,08,230/-. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3003/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Supriyo Bag 3 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that similar issue has been taken up by the ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Kolkata dated 19th May, 2025 in the case of Smt. Kajari Banerjee -vs.- Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 130/KOL/2025, wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee. Ld. counsel also submitted that the ld. Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked the provisions of section 56(2)(x) in the case of assessee and similarly the same was wrongly affirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench to set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative pleaded before the Bench to uphold the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. From the record, it is found that all payments were made through banking channel and, the conclusion drawn by the ld. Assessing Officer is against on facts on record available in the assessment folder as all the materials were before the ld. Assessing Officer. Similarly, ld. CIT(Appeals) has not appreciated these facts correctly and simply confirmed the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. I find that the ld. Assessing Officer has wrongly made the addition and similarly ld. CIT(Appeals) affirmed Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3003/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Supriyo Bag 4 the same. I notice that the ld. Assessing Officer has considered the stamp duty value as on the date of registration of agreement to sell for the purpose of determining the applicability of section 56(2)(x) of the Act. Hence, the question arises is whether the allotment letter can be considered as agreement to sell within the meaning of the provisos to section 56(2)(x) of the Act, which states that the stamp duty valuation as on the sale agreement should be taken into consideration for the purpose of section 56(2)(x), provided that amount of consideration or part thereof had been paid as per the mode prescribed on or before the date of agreement for transfer of such immovable property. Since the assessee had paid the parts of consideration as per the terms and conditions of allotment through banking channels prior to the execution of sale agreement, I am of the view that the provisos to section 56(2)(x) of the Act shall apply to the facts of the present case. Hence, the ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in considering the stamp duty valuation as on the date of execution of agreement to sell. It is imperative on the part of assessee to show that the actual consideration was equal or less than the stamp duty valuation as on the date of issue of respective allotment letters. 6.1. By respectfully following the decision of ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Kolkata dated 19th May, 2025 in the case of Smt. Kajari Banerjee - vs.- Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 130/KOL/2025, I find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. Therefore, I am restoring the issue to the file of ld. Assessing Officer for the limited purpose of comparing the actual sale consideration with the stamp duty valuation as on the date of respective allotment letters. In the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3003/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Supriyo Bag 5 limited set aside, the ld. Assessing Officer shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/03/2026. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 27th day of March, 2026 Copies to :(1) Supriyo Bag, 125-B/2, S.N. Roy Road, Behala-700038, Kolkata (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-61(3), Kolkata, Bamboo Villa, Central Revenue Building, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700014 (3) CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , Kolkata; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com "