SHILPA ANKIT PATEL,AMBERNATH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, THANE, THANE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM ITA No. 3311/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shilpa Ankit Patel ACIT, Central Circle-2, Thane Plot No. 1111, Akshardham, Kansai Vs. Section, Ambernath (E), Thane 421501. PAN/GIR No. CPKPP1242L (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vijay Patel Respondent by : Shri Vivek Perampura, (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 29.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This appeal has been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune-11 (‘ld. CIT(A)’ for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That, the learned CIT(A)-11, Pune has grossly erred in not considering the impugned block assessment order passed is against natural justice and bad in law. The AO may please be directed to annul the impugned block assessment order. 2. That, the learned CIT(A)-11, Pune is not justified in upholding the additionRs.4,51,300/-, on account of want of source of payment of stamp duty and registration charges against the purchase of agricultural land when the payment was made by the father of the appellant. The Assessing Officer may please be directed to delete such addition.”

ITA No. 3311/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Shilpa Ankit Patel 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and is daughter in law of the head of the Patel RPL Realty Group and had filed her return of income dated 29.08.2019, declaring total income at Rs. 6,23,830/-. Pursuant to search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act conducted in the case of Patel RPL Realty Group including the assessee dated 08.08.2019, notice u/s. 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.01.2020. The assessee filed her return of income in response to the said notice declaring total income same as that of the returned income. The ld. AO passed the assessment order u/s. 153A of the Act dated 18.09.2021, determining total income at Rs. 10,75,130/- after making addition of Rs. 4,51,300/- towards the stamp duty and registration charges paid by the assessee for purchase of land as unexplained payment u/s. 69C of the Act. 4. Aggrieved the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority, who vide order dated 13.03.2025 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has failed to substantiate its claim and failed to furnish documentary evidences to controvert the finding of ld. AO. 5. The assessee is in appeal before us, challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the assessee has incurred expenditure of Rs. 4,51,300/- which according to the lower authorities was not reflected in her balance sheet or P & L account and the same was expended for stamp duty and registration charges paid by cash. Before the lower authorities, the assessee contended that the said amount was received in cash from her father who was farmer but had failed to file any confirmation pertaining to the

ITA No. 3311/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Shilpa Ankit Patel same from her father. The ld. AO made an addition on the impugned amount for the reason that the assessee has failed to furnish any documentary evidence in support of her contention and the same was upheld by the ld. CIT(A) for the reason that the assessee has failed to explain the source of the payment made by the assessee in cash. Before us, the learned Authorised Representative ('ld. AR' for short) for the assessee haws filed an application for admission of additional evidence in the nature of affidavit from the father of the assessee and prayed that the same be admitted and adjudicated. 7. The learned Departmental Representative ('ld. DR' for short) for the revenue opposed to the same for the reason that the assessee has failed to justify why the same was not file before the lower authorities. 8. Upon perusal of the rival contentions, we deem it fit to extend the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate her claim by cogent documentary evidences for which we hereby remand this issue back to the file of ld. AO to verify the additional evidence filed by the assessee. The ld. AO is directed to decide the issue on the merits of the case and in accordance with law on the basis of the submission made by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceeding without any undue delay on her side. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.09.2025

Sd/- Sd/- (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 3311/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Shilpa Ankit Patel Mumbai; Dated: 30.09.2025 Karishma J. Pawar (Stenographer) Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT- concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai