JAYA AMITABH BACHCHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, MUMBAI
Facts
The assessee's property was allegedly sold based on an agreement to sell, statements from a broker, and WhatsApp communications. The buyer disputed the agreement's contents, and bank records showed a different amount credited than stated in the agreement.
Held
The Tribunal held that the material on record did not establish with sufficient reliability that the assessee received the alleged cash amount of ₹3.83 crore during the relevant previous year. The inconsistencies in statements and lack of particulars did not prove the cash receipt by the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the alleged cash consideration for the sale of property was actually received by the assessee during the relevant assessment year, and if the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified based on the evidence.
Sections Cited
Section 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘F’ BENCH
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR&
PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): These two appeals, preferred by the assessee, Smt. Jaya Amitabh Bachchan, for Assessment Years 2019–20 and 2020– 21, arise from separate assessment orders but concern the 2 ITA No.283 & ITSSA No.284/Mum/2026 Smt. Jaya Amitabh Bachchan same alleged transaction relating to Plot No. B-130, Sector 44, Noida. The additions made in both years rest substantially upon a document described as an agreement to sell, statements recorded during the investigation and WhatsApp communications recovered from the mobile phone of Shri Amit Chauhan, stated to be the broker. Since the material and the principal controversy are common, the appeals were heard to
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.
