ASGARALI MAZHARALI MANIHAR,ANKLESHWAR vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), BHARUCH, BHARUCH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SURAT BENCH, BENCH
[Conducted through Hybrid mode at Ahmedabad Bench]
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member
Asgarali Mazharali
Manihar
Plot No. 184, Alif Manzil,
Kapodara Road, Noble
Market, Ankleshwar,
Surat, Gujarat-393002
PAN: CPWPM7542G
(Appellant)
Vs
The ITO,
Ward-2(1),
Bharuch
(Respondent)
Assessee Represented: Shri Mehul Shah, CA
Revenue Represented: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr.DR
Date of hearing
: 03-03-2026
Date of pronouncement : 13-03-2026
आदेश/ORDER
PER: T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the ex-parte appellate order dated 23-09-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21. ITA No: 1323/SRT/2025
Assessment Year: 2020-21
I.T.A No. 1323/SRT/2025 - A.Y. 2020-21
2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 09.01.2021 declaring total income of Rs.4,21,660/-. During assessment proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee along with six others purchased an immovable property in Survey
No.183
at Ankleshwar on 26.11.2019 for a consideration of Rs.9 Lakhs as per sale deed, whereas, the Stamp Authority fixed the total value of the property at Rs.2,84,20,000/-.
Thereby, there is a difference of Rs.39,31,428/- as the assessee’s
1/7th share, which was chargeable to tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(x)(b) of the Act. Hence, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee. Assessee made a reply that the sale deed was cancelled by cancellation deed registered as document no.14011 of 2022, dated 26.09.2022. Therefore, the question of invoking Section 56(2)(x)(b) of the Act does not arise.
This explanation was not accepted by the AO whereby made addition of Rs.39,31,428/- and demanded tax thereon.
Aggrieved against the assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the addition made by the AO u/s. 56(2)(x)(b) of the Act.
Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising following Grounds of Appeal:
“1. On the facts and circumstances as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer in in making addition of Rs 39,31,428/- u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act.
It is therefore prayed that assessment framed u/s 143(3) the Act may kindly be quashed and/or addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) may please be deleted
I.T.A No. 1323/SRT/2025 - A.Y. 2020-21
3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”
Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record including the Paper Book filed by the assessee. It is undisputed fact that the assessee along with six other co-owners entered into a purchase transaction for immovable property at Survey No. 183 at Ankleshwar by executing a sale deed on 27.11.2019. However, the same was registered with the Sub-