RAVINDRA TUKARAM PAWAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO,42(1)(4), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, MUMBAI

ITA 4715/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 August 2026AY 2016-178 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order confirming an addition made under Section 147. The assessee claimed a property transfer occurred in FY 2003-04 due to an exchange arrangement, not in FY 2015-16 as per the sale agreement. The lower authorities held that the assessee failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence for the earlier transfer.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the issue was primarily factual and depended on documentary evidence not produced before the lower authorities. To ensure substantial justice, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, subject to a cost of Rs. 11,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the property transfer occurred in FY 2003-04 or FY 2015-16, and the validity of the assessment proceedings without proper documentary evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 2(47),Section 53A,Section 48,Section 55(2),Section 2(29A),Section 112,Section 50C,Section 45,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271F,Section 273B,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Appellant: Shri Karna Thaker C.A, Shri Mahesh Londhe – SR DR
Hearing: 05/08/2026

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 23/02/2026, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, the learned CIT(A)] for Assessment Year 2016-17, raising following grounds:

1.

VALIDITY OF REOPENING — NO LAWFUL 'REASON TO BELIEVE' The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment without adjudicating the juri ictional challenge to the reopening u/s 147. The Assessing Officer did not possess any valid 'reason to believe' that income

Ravindra Tukaram Pawar, 2 had escaped assessment; the AO merely reli

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 147

All 48,773 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →