ITA No.1186/MUM/2026

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, ZIA SALIM DESAI, did not file her return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018. The assessing officer issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reassessment proceedings due to a difference in the purchase consideration and stamp duty value of an acquired immovable property. The assessee did not comply with the notice or furnish a return of income. The Assessing Officer carried out an enquiry and found that the assessee had purchased an immovable property for a transaction value of Rs. 71,74,900/-, with a stamp duty value of Rs.1,55,81,500/-. The difference in the purchase consideration and stamp duty value of Rs.84,06,600/- was liable to be taxed under section 56(2)(vii) of the Act. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notices proposing additions of Rs.79,85,880/- under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and Rs.84,06,600/- under section 56(2)(vii) of the Act. The assessee did not submit any reply to the show cause notices, and the Assessing Officer passed an ex-party assessment order on 8th May 2023. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner [Appeals], raising grounds of appeal against the assessment order. The Commissioner [Appeals] issued notices for hearing the assessee but she failed to respond, leading to an ex-party order on 28th May 2024, upholding the additions made by the assessing officer. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which was delayed by 553 days due to the tax consultant's…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal without giving proper & sufficient opportunity.
• 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 79,85,880/- under the provisions of section 69 of the Act.
• 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 84,06,600/- as variation in the value of the immovable property purchased under the provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Satpal Darshan Singh Bhinder vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai bench

• Zahida Bano Mohammad Yusuf Shaikh v/s Income Tax Officer, Ward-41(4)(4)

• Shri Vardhman Stanakwasi Shrawat Sangh vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai bench

• Mahendra Manshi Nagda vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Raghvendra Singh

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed

• Arnab Kumar Goswami vs. ITO, Ward-62(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed