Pankaj Dhandharia vs. ACIT-22(1), Mumbai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Mr. Pankaj Dhandharia, filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 27 October 2017, reporting a total income of Rs. 5,755,640. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessee was asked to submit details of properties held and other income details. The return was examined, and an assessment under section 143(3) was passed on 9 December 2019. The assessee was issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 30 June 2021 for purchasing a duplex property for Rs. 130,500,000 from Aegis Realtors and Developers Private Limited. The assessee paid Rs. 9,006,600 as stamp duty and Rs. 30,000 as registration fees. The stamp duty valuation of the property was Rs. 180,131,000. The assessee filed an appeal against the reassessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act on 6 November 2023 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, which was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) on 7 February 2024.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in computing the total income of the Appellant at Rs 5,53,44,602 as against the returned income of Rs.57,55,640?
• 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) failed to provide the Appellant an opportunity of being heard through video-conference hearing?
• 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made under section 50(2)(vi) of the Act amounting to Rs 4,96,31,000?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Vipinchandra M. Chokhawala vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dhule

  Pune bench

• ITA 924/BANG/2026

  Bangalore bench

• Raghvendra Singh

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed

• Padmakshi Chakraborty Vs ITO Ward-25(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2020-2021Allowed

• Mayur Kanubhai Shah vs ITO, Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench 'E', Mumbai benchAY 2016-17Remanded

• Shivlal Gandubhai Satodia Vs. ITO

  Rajkot bench