SANJEEV DESAI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI
What were the facts?
The assessee received Rs. 84,00,000/- from a family friend, which was treated as a loan. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment and added this amount under Section 56(2)(vii)(a) as income from undisclosed sources, considering it a gift.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the amount was a loan, not a gift, supported by a confirmation letter from the lender and the lender's Will bequeathing the amount to the assessee's wife. Therefore, the addition under Section 56(2)(vii)(a) was unjustified.
What were the issues?
Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether the amount received was a loan or a gift taxable under Section 56(2)(vii)(a).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 151,Section 143(3),Section 143(2),Section 56(2)(vii)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising from the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] dated 29.12.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer, Income Tax Officer, Ward- 52(4), New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2011-12. [A.Y 2011-12]
Assessee filed the following grounds of appeal as under: 1.1 “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the validity of notice issued u/s 148 of the In
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 147
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 640/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 639/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 638/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Kishorbhai C Bhagtani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 999/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Malhar Nitin Bhuptani, Rajkotq vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1054/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Bisleri International PVT.LTD, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner, Central Revenue Building, BhubaneswarOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S Saraswat Infra And Projects, Sundergarh vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Kamalakanta Nayak vs. The State Tax Officer, Mayurbhanj Circle,BalasoreOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S Vedvyas Logistics Private Limited, Sundargarh vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S Harilal Agarwalla vs. State Tax Officer, Kendrapara CircleOrissa · 7 Oct 2026