SHEFALI MANSINGH ,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(4), UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7066/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 December 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member)5 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was based on a wrong presumption of facts. Since the entire sale consideration was credited to the husband's bank account and offered to tax by him, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Non-Resident, appealed against an order related to capital gains on the sale of an immovable property. The Assessing Officer made an addition for Short Term Capital Gains, alleging the notice u/s 148 was served, but the assessee claimed no notice was ever received. The property was jointly owned with the husband, and the entire sale consideration was received and offered to tax by the husband.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for capital gains made in the hands of the assessee is sustainable when the entire sale consideration was received and offered to tax by her husband, who was a co-owner of the property.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI

Hearing: 15/12/2025Pronounced: 15/12/2025

(A.Y.2012-13) Shefali Mansingh, Flat No. 201, Tower No. IC, Land Craft Golf Links, NH-24, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201015 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant PAN: BAUPM-2656-P बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(4), Aayakar Bhawan, A-2D, Sector-24, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 201307 अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant by : S/Shri Sahil Sharma & Sanjay Parashar, Advocates प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date of hearing : 15/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date of pronouncement : 15/12/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 19.08.2025, for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The appeal is time barred by 04 days. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, the delay has been caused for the reasons stated in petition which appears to be bonafide. Thus, delay of 04 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits.

(AY 2012-13) 3. Shri Sahil Sharma, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is a Non-Resident. Notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the impugned assessment year was purportedly issued to the assessee on the basis of AIR information that the assessee has sold immovable property i.e. a Residential Flat No.1181, Tower-II, ATS Village, Plot No.01, Sector 93A, Noida for Rs.60,00,000/- during Financial Year 2011-12. In fact, no notice u/s.148 of the Act or any subsequent notice was ever served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment in ex-parte proceedings making addition of Rs.45,00,000/- as Short Term Capital Gains on the sale of asset. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30.11.2019 passed u/s.147/144 of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) explaining that husband of the assessee and the assessee were the joint owners of immovable property bearing no. Flat No. 1181, Tower No. 11, ATS Greens Village, Plot No 01, Sector 93A, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, UP. The property was sold vide registered sale deed dated 23.06.2011. The entire consideration of Rs.60,00,000/- was received by the assessee’s husband in his bank account, hence, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee with regard to capital gains on sale of said property. To substantiate his submissions the ld. Counsel referred to the bank account statement of Shri Yash Mansingh at pages 23 to 46 of the paper book. The amounts credited in the bank account of the assessee’s husband reconciles with the consideration mentioned in the registered sale deed. The husband of the assessee has reflected the said sales in his return of income. Hence, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee.

4.

Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for upholding the same.

(AY 2012-13) 5. Both sides heard. The short issue in the present appeal is with respect to the addition of Rs.45,00,000/- on account of capital gains on sale of immovable property. It is evident from the sale deed placed on record at page no.47 to 69 of the paper book that the assessee is a co-owner of immovable property bearing no. Type “B”, 8th Floor Dwelling Unit/Flat No. 1181, Situated III Tower No. 11, ATS Greens Village, Plot No 01, Sector 93A, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, UP. The said property is jointly owned by the assessee with her husband Shri Yash Mansingh. A perusal of the sale deed shows that the said property was sold for a consideration of Rs.60,00,000/- and sale consideration was paid in following manner:-

Mode of payment Dated Amount 1. By Ch. No. 4653467 7/4/11 Rs.17,00,000/- Drawn on S.B.I. Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad.

2. By RTGS NO. SBINH11111307694 Rs.13,00,000/- By S.B.I. Ghaziabad, 3. By D.D. No. 253054 18/6/11 Rs. 30,00,000/- Drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd., Mumbai BR.

6.

The said sale consideration is stated to have been entirely credited in the bank account of assessee’s husband. Bank statement of the assessee’s husband Shri Yash Mansingh is available on record at pages 23 to 46 of the paper book. On perusal of the bank statement it is evident that the aforesaid amounts have been credited in the CITI Bank account of Shri Yash Mansingh on following dates:

Date Amounts 18.04.20211 Rs.17,00,000/- 21.04.2011 Rs.13,00,000/- 06.07.2011 Rs.30,00,000/- Rs.60,00,000/-

7.

Since, the entire amount has been credited in the bank account of assessee’s husband and the same has been offered to tax by the assessee‘s husband no

8.

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 15th day of December, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →