NAINA DESAI - LEGAL HEIR OF LATE NITIN CHANDRAKANT DESAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), MUMBAI
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against an addition made under section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) was dismissed by the CIT(A) for not admitting additional evidence. The assessee contended that the land purchased was agricultural and not a capital asset as it was beyond municipal limits.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission that the additional evidence was crucial to the matter. Therefore, the Tribunal admitted the additional evidence and restored the issue to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting additional evidence regarding the nature of the land purchased. Whether the land in question qualifies as a capital asset under the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR
PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A)-NFAC, dated 30.12.2023, for the assessment year 2018-19 in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) of the Act being the difference between the stamp duty value and the agreement value.
ITA 1663/MUM/2026 NAINA DESAI
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 56(2)(x)(b)(B)
- Neelam Singh, Mathura vs ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), MathuraITA 390/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Santosh Malik, Mathura vs ITO Ward 1(3)(1), MathuraITA 408/AGR/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Nitin Santosh Singh, Mumbai vs Ward 24(3)(1), Mumbai, Piramal ChamberITA 5261/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Biswajit Das, Coochbehar vs DCIT, Circle 2(1), JalpaiguriITA 3225/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: Disposed8 Sept 2026AY 2020-2021
- Adarsh, Brahmnagar Auraiya vs Registrar, Sanjay Place AgraITA 344/AGR/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Prakash Enterprises Its Proprietor Sudhir Kumar Choudhary vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Sree Narayan Construction vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Recro Furniture Private Limited vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- Ipca Laboratories LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Jt. Secretary, Dept. Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 6 Oct 2026
- Scottment Alco Bev Fillers PVT LTD vs. State Of ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh · 5 Oct 2026