SWETASREE GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 30(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that the property transfer was completed in 2011, with sale consideration paid and possession handed over then. Therefore, Section 56(2)(vii) might not be applicable for the assessment year 2015-16.
What were the facts?
The assessee purchased a property and the registration occurred in the assessment year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer made an addition under Section 56(2)(vii) as the purchase value was less than the stamp duty value.
What were the issues?
Whether the transfer of property was completed in the year 2011, making the addition under Section 56(2)(vii) in assessment year 2015-16 invalid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg
आदेश / ORDER The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.11.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The only issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is relating to the addition made by the Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Act holding that the assessee during the year purchased a property, value of which was less than the stamp duty value of the said property.
Assessment Year: 2015-16 Swetashree Ghosh
The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that during the year, only the registration of the property took place. However, transfer of the property as per the provisions of section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act was completed in the year 2011 itself. The ld. Counsel, in this respect, has relied upon the agreement to sale of the year 2007, the reference to which has also been made in the sale deed in question. The ld. Counsel has further explained that the entire sale consideration was paid in the year 2011 itself and the possession of the property was also handed over to the assessee by the concerned seller. That thereafter the assessee even rented out the said property to certain persons and the rental income was also taken into consideration for the purpose of filing of income-tax return etc. That merely because the registration was done in the year 2015 that does not mean that the transfer was not completed in the year 2011. The ld. Counsel has therefore submitted that the impugned addition in the assessment year 2015-16 is not tenable.
The ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the findings of the lower authorities. 5. In my view, there is force in the contention of the ld. AR. However, the facts need to be verified at the end of the Assessing Officer. In view of this, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction that the Assessing Officer will verify the contentions of the assessee as to the date of completion of the transfer of the property as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act and if the transfer was completed in the year 2011 and the assessee had received the property in the year 2011, then, the provisions of section 56(2)(vii) will not attract in the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer will not Assessment Year: 2015-16 Swetashree Ghosh only verify the contention of the assessee about rental income offered on the property for taxation but may also examine the records of the seller whether the seller had booked the sale or give possession of the property in that year. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present necessary details and thereafter, to decide the issue afresh by way of a speaking order.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)
- Surekha Subhash Parve, Pune vs ITO Ward - 4(5), PuneITA 3137/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Hasumatiben Harkishanbhai Parmar, Surat vs ITO, Ward-2(3)(2), SuratITA 1467/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Naresh Kumar, Gurgaon, Haryana vs PCIT, JaipurITA 209/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Anwar Hussain Karam Hussain Khan, Thane vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), ThaneITA 3191/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Sopna Rani Pandhy, Uttar Pradesh vs Income Tax, Officer, Ward 2(2)(3), GhaziabadITA 6453/DEL/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026