ROHAN DEVELOPMENT,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 32(3)(2), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7639 & 7640/M/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Rohan Development, Income Tax Officer, 1, Yashodhan, Chandavarkar, Ward 32(3)(2), Vs. Road No.1, Borivali West, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai – 400092. Bandra Kurla Complex, PAN – AAOFR8717P Mumbai - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Rashmikant Kundalia, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 17.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 29.04.2026 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 26.09.2025, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2015-16.

ITA No.7639 & 7640/M/2025 2 Rohan Development 3. Coming to ITA No.7639/M/2025, we observe that in the instant case, the Assessee has sold various flats on a consideration below than the stamp duty valuation /ready reckoner value, as detailed in para no.3 of the assessment order and therefore, the AO vide assessment order dated 27.12.2017 under Section 143(3) of the Act, made the addition of Rs.1,18,11,922/- being differential amount between the stamp duty valuation and the agreement value/consideration shown by the Assessee and added the same as per the provision of Section 43CA of the Act, in the income of the Assessee.

ITA No.7639 & 7640/M/2025 3 Rohan Development 7. We have heard the parties and given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and rival submissions of the parties. Before us, the Assessee has also filed a copy of the occupation certificate dated 16.07.2021 issued by the MCGM based on the completion certificate issued by the Architect on dated 12.11.2020, which was admittedly not filed before the authorities below. Further, the Assessee has agitated that the Ld. Commissioner would have considered the stamp duty value, as on the date of allotment letter, and thereafter only would have applied the statutory tolerance band of 10%. Further, the Assessee has already offered the consideration amount received from various purchasers, to tax. Thus, these facts, in our considered view requires to be considered again / afresh, as it is the mandate of law as prescribed under Section 43CA(3) of the Act, that where the date of agreement fixing the value of consideration for transfer of assets and the date of registration of such transfer of assets are not the same, then the value referred to in sub-section (1) may be taken, as the value accessible by any other authority of State Government for the purpose of payment of stamp duty, in respect of such transfer on the date of the agreement. The said provision further subjected to the condition of receiving the consideration amount or part thereof by way of account payee cheque or account payee bank draft or by use of electronic clearing system through a bank account or any other electronic mode, as per the stamp duty prescribed on or before the date of agreement for transfer of the asset.

ITA No.7639 & 7640/M/2025 4 Rohan Development 9. In the instant case, the Assessee has filed various documents such as allotment letters, registered sale agreements, possession letters, certificate for completion of construction, comparative table for difference between stamp duty as on the date of allotment letter viz-a-viz sale value as per the agreement, financials of FY 2018-19 and 2021-22 in order to show that the Assessee has already offered the consideration amount received, to tax and the details of the flats on which income has been offered to tax in the corresponding years. Thus, in view of the above, we deem it appropriate to remand the instant case to the file of the JAO for decision afresh in the context of parameters as prescribed in Section 43CA(3) of the Act and the aforesaid documents, which the Assessee under takes to file in due course of time before the AO. Further, we clarify that the AO, on verifying the claim and documents as genuine and allowable, shall also provide the benefit of 10% safe harbour/tolerance limit as prescribed in the relevant provision of Section 43CA of the Act, if applicable. Suffice it to say, the AO shall also provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

ITA No.7639 & 7640/M/2025 5 Rohan Development

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

(Tarun Kushwaha) Sr. Private Secretary

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order

Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.