Kalpana Vijay Kadam Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Summary: The Pune ITAT set aside the reassessment proceedings against Kalpana Vijay Kadam for AY 2016-17, where she had jointly purchased a property with her husband. The Assessing Officer had issued a Section 148 notice, alleging unexplained investment, without considering her 50% share and the existence of a home loan. The Tribunal found that the assessee’s share of the property was only ₹33.47 lakhs, well below the ₹50 lakh threshold required for reopening assessments after three years under Section 149(1)(b). The ITAT criticized the tax authorities for failing to verify the facts and for relying on presumptions. As a result, the ITAT quashed the Section 148 notice and deleted all additions, reaffirming the importance of statutory thresholds and procedural fairness in tax proceedings.
Facts of the Case
Kalpana Vijay Kadam, an individual taxpayer, along with her husband, jointly purchased a residential flat in Pune for a total consideration of ₹66,95,000. The registered sale agreement, executed on 29th May 2015, clearly mentioned both spouses as joint purchasers. The payment for the property was structured in multiple instalments, as specified in the agreement, corresponding to various stages of construction. Despite this, the Assessing Officer, relying on information from the TDS portal and other risk management systems, observed that Kalpana Vijay Kadam had not filed her income tax return for Assessment Year 2016-17. Consequently, he initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, issuing a notice under Section 148 after more than three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The AO presumed that the entire investment in the property was made by the assessee and treated the full amount as unexplained, disregarding the existence of a substantial home loan.
