IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER)

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assessee by Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/R Revenue by Shri Vikas Chandra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.01.2026

ORDER

Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM:

Presentappealfiled by assessee arises out of order dated

17/09/2025 passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld.CIT(A)”], for Assessment Year 2017-18 on following grounds of appeal:-

“1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer has erred in assessing the income of the Appellant at RS.47,74,681/-. As such the addition of Rs.47,74,681/- under the head income from other sources u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) may please be deleted.

2) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and despite providing all the explanations with evidences called for, the Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in making an addition of Rs.47,74,681/- under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in contravention of the provisions of the said section, wherein, the Agreement for the purchase of the residential flat was registered on 23/02/2017.

3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in making the addition of Rs.47,74,681/- under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the premise that the Appellant has failed to prove that the entire consideration was paid by the Appellants spouse.

4) That the Assessing Officer has misdirected himself or has routinely initiated proceedings under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as underreporting of income, where, in fact, the purported underreporting is a matter of incorrect application of law and thus devoid of merits and contrary to law and needs to be quashed and prayed for accordingly.

5) The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/or delete any/all of the above grounds of Appeal before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal.”

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

The assessee had not filed any return of income for the year under consideration as she is a home-maker. However, based on information passed through the Insight Portal regarding assessee having entered into purchase of an immovable property at Rs.46,13,239/- where the stamp duly value adopted was Rs.1,41,62,600/-,notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. The Ld.AO was of the opinion that there was difference of Rs.95,49,361/- between agreement value as well as the stamp duty value.

2.1. After completing the due procedure under the new provisions of Section 148A notice u/s 148 was issued on 31/07/2022. The assessee was thereafter called upon to furnish of the details regarding the purchase of immovable property, details of the consideration etc. Ld.AO invoked provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b)of the Act regarding the difference in the value as per the agreement and as per the stamp duty authority.

2.2. In response to the statutory notice, assessee submitted before Ld.AO that, she is a home-maker and is not engaged in any kind of business activity. It was submitted that, during the year under consideration she had received income by way of bank interest and dividend income and that she had account in Abhyudaya BankLtd., copy of the bank statement was furnished before Ld.AO. It was submitted that, during financial year relevant to AY 2011-12, assessee along with her husband as a joint-owner, purchased a property from Evergreen Developers. Assessee in reply furnished before Ld.AO had submitted that, she was a co-applicant to the said agreement, for purchase of the immovable property.

2.3. It was submitted that on 13/03/2009, a flat with 760 sq.ft. Carpet area was booked in A-wing No. 901, of Anand Heights at Survey No.340,341,34