GANESH PRASAD MATHRAN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 43(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3239/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 July 2026AY 2020-20215 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal and confirming the addition. It noted the discrepancy between the stamp duty valuation and the valuation reports from the DVO and a registered valuer, which closely matched the consideration paid.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased an immovable property for Rs. 30,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) adopted the stamp duty valuation of Rs. 1,52,46,000/- as the fair market value, leading to an addition under Section 56(2)(x). The assessee contended that the valuation reports from the DVO and a registered valuer were significantly lower.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correct determination of the fair market value of the immovable property for the purpose of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, given conflicting valuation reports.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(x)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2020-21 dated 12.12.2025. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:

"

1.

For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal and in confirming the addition of Rs.1,22,46,000/- made under section 56(2)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the adoption of stamp duty valuation of Rs. 1,52,46,000/- as fair market value of the property, despite the fact that the A.O had submitted the Remand Report wherein he attached a copy of the ITA No(s). 3239/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2020-21 Ganesh Prasad Mathran. valuation report submitted by the DVO estimating the FMV of the property at Rs. 53,55,504/-.

3.

For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in disregarding the valuation report of a Government Registered Valuer empaneled with the CBDT, who after physical inspection and application of applicable circle rates, determined the fair market value at Rs. 28,27,000/-, which closely matched the actual consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- paid by the appellant.

4.

That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal."

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed the return of income on 02.01.2021 for AY 2020-21 declaring total income at ₹7,00,460/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') noted that the assessee had made an investment in an immovable property for a consideration of ₹30,00,000/- in FY 2019-20. However, as per the report of the Stamp Valuation Authority/the

More judgments on Section 56(2)(x)

All 565 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(x) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →