KALIM SHEIKHJALIL SHEIKH,CHANDRAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, CHANDRAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 21/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 April 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a difference of up to 10% between the Fair Market Value and Stamp Duty Value should be ignored, and no addition should be made under Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii). For the unexplained investment, the Tribunal allowed partial relief, finding that the assessee could explain Rs. 4.00 lakh of the amount.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased an immovable property, and the difference between the Stamp Duty Value and the DVO's valuation was approximately 10%. The assessee also claimed an unexplained investment of Rs. 5,55,330/- from past savings from business and agriculture.

What were the issues?

Whether an addition is warranted under Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) when the difference between the Stamp Duty Value and DVO's valuation is around 10%? Whether the assessee has adequately explained the source of funds for an investment under Section 69?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii),Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Mohammed
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Hearing: 12.03.2026Pronounced: 13.04.2026

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, न गपुर SMC बेंच, 4. न गपुर / DR, ITAT, “Nagpur SMC Bench, Nagpur ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5.

आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, न गपुर/ ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii)

All 128 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →