VINAYA BINDUMADHAV CHITGOPKAR,MUMBAI vs. WARD 32(2)(1), MUMBAI

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee does not wish to press ground no. 1 and 2, hence, the same are dismissed as not pressed.

In this regard, it was submitted that the assessee has purchased a flat jointly with her husband from CPI-Gera Realty India Private Limited vide registration deed dated 23.09.2015 for an agreed consideration of Rs. 1,11,10,551/-. It was further submitted that it was also agreed with the developer at the time of entering to the agreement that the stamp duty and registration charges shall also be payable through the developer and in this regard, our reference was drawn to the sale deed and in particular, Schedule 2C which talks about payments towards customization/options, stamp duty, registration shall be payable in favour of CPI-Gera Realty India Private Limited. It was submitted that in accordance with the said understanding with the developer, the purchase consideration along the sum of Rs. 6,66,700/- was paid to the developer and that sum was paid by the husband of the assessee out of the loan funds as well as the savings of the husband and in this regard, our reference was drawn to the payments made through the IDBI Bank and HDFC bank and it was accordingly submitted that the amount of Rs. 6,66,700/- which was treated as unexplained by the Assessing Officer is clearly out of the savings as well as the borrowings done by the husband of the assessee and all these payment have been duly reflected in the bank account of the husband of the assessee and thereafter, the same have been paid to the builder by the husband of the assessee and therefore, there cannot be any dispute regarding the source of the payment towards stamp duty which has been duly discharged through the developer as against the general practice, where the same is paid directly by the assessee to the Stamp Duty Authority. It was submitted

The ld. DR has been heard, who has relied on the order passed by the lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee along with her husband has purchased the flat jointly from CPI-Gera Realty India Private Limited for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,11,10,551/-. There has been no dispute raised by the Assessing Officer as well as by the ld. CIT(A) in terms of the source of investment out of borrowed funds from the banks as well as the husband’s own savings and all these transactions are clearly evident from the IDBI Bank and HDFC Bank statements. The limited dispute relates to the source of payment of the stamp duty of Rs. 6,66,700/- which has been disputed by the Assessing Officer. In this regard, with the assistance of ld. AR during the course of hearing, we have gone through the relevant schedule of the sale deed as well as the payments made by the husband of the assessee from his bank account to the developer and find that the source of payment of stamp duty is clearly evident from the funds stand credited in the assessee’s husband bank account. In light of the same, the addition so sustained by the ld. CIT(A) amounting to Rs. 3,33,350/- is hereby directed to be deleted.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.