BHAVIN RASIKLAL GADOYA ,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI
BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(Physical hearing)
Bhavin Rasiklal Gadoya,
134/D42, Vishava
Co-operative Housing
Society, Sector -1,
Charkop,Kandivali(West),
Mumbai-400067. Vs
Assessment Unit Income Tax
Department
Delhi.
PAN: AHEPG0156E
(Appellant)
..
(Respondent)
Assessee by Shri. Vipul Shah, Advocate
Revenue by Shri. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing
08/07/2025
Date of Pronouncement
28/07/2025
Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/ Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Ld. CIT(A)) dated 18.08.2024 for A.Y. 2020-21. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “ 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law while adjudicating the appeal the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) ["CIT(A)"] erred in not adjudicating the following grounds of appeal; a. No personal opportunity of hearing was granted to the Appellant while finalising the assessment due to technical reasons, which violates principles of natural justice.
b. Year of execution of agreement was 05.02.2019 relevant to A.Y.
2019-20 and not the A.Y. 2020-21. c. Year of booking of the flat was 30.04.2010 and accordingly transaction pertain to A.Y. 2011-12 and not A.Y. 2020-21, as upheld by the CIT(A).
Bhavin Rasiklal Gadoya
2
d. Year of Contract was F.Y. 2010-11 and not F.Y. 2019-20. The valuation of Property was Rs.56,73,953/-.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that as per Sec. 47 of the Indian Registration Act 1908, upon registration of the document, it relates back to the date of execution and accordingly the transaction pertains to A.Y. 2019-20 and not A.Y. 2020-21. On that count the addition made is bad in law is liable to be deleted.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in not following the Circular No. 471 dated 15.10.1986 and 672 dated 16.12.1993 issued by the CBDT, which are binding to the Income tax department.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in partially accepting the Valuation Report by considering the valuation as at 23.04.2019 and not considering valuation as on 08.04.2010, and the year of booking as A.Y. 2011-12. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that it is a settled position of law that the allotment letters should be considered as agreements for sale, especially when part payment was made through banking channels before the sale agreement.
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, the learned Assessing Officer erred in not appreciating a fact that as per section 56(2)(x), the provisions of section are applicable only in the cases where any immovable property is "received in any previous year". In the case of the Appellant, the property is still under construction and possession of the said flat has not been received till date. On that count itself, provisions of section 56(2)(x) were not applicable to the Appellant and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is bad in law and liable to be deleted.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that there was a delay by the Developer in registering the agreement due to a change of plans and no delay by the Appellant.
The Appellant craves leave to add, amend and/or alter all or any of the grounds of appeal.”
The brief facts of the case as gathered from the orders of lower authorities are that assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for relevant assessment year from 26.12.2020 declaring taxable income of Rs. 18,12,200/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. During the assessment, the Bhavin Rasiklal Gadoya 3
Assessing Officer (AO) noted that assessee purchased immovable property being Flat no. 709, 7th Floor, Hari Dham-2, R.K. Singh Marg, Aambewadi,
Andheri(E), Mumbai-400069 and has shown sale consideration of Rs.
99,66,000/- on the agreement to sale registered with sub-