Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Property Purchase Addition Remanded Due to Unverified Agreement Date

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 867
Case Name
Pratish Shah(HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2018-19
Advertisement

Pratish Shah(HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)

Stamp Duty Value as on Date of Agreement to Be Considered — ITAT Surat Remands Section 56(2)(vii)(b) Addition

The Surat Bench of the ITAT set aside the orders of the AO and CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 and remanded the matter for fresh verification, holding that where the date of agreement and date of registration differ, the stamp duty value as on the date of agreement must be considered for the purposes of section 56(2)(vii)(b), subject to factual verification.

Key observations of the Tribunal:

  • Statutory proviso overlooked: The proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) mandates adoption of stamp duty value as on the date of agreement if consideration is fixed earlier and part payment is made through banking channels.
  • Assessee’s claim requires verification: The assessee (HUF) claimed that the first payment of ₹1,00,000 by cheque on 18-02-2013 constituted the date of agreement, with subsequent payments made over the years and formal registration later. However, supporting evidence was not on record.
  • Revenue’s objection noted: In absence of a written agreement or proof of the alleged initial payment, the Revenue contested adoption of the earlier date.
  • Remand in the interest of justice: The ITAT directed the AO to verify the cheque payment dated 18-02-2013 from the sale deed or other admissible evidence to be produced by the assessee.
  • Conditional relief: If the assessee substantiates the payment and agreement date, the AO shall recompute the addition by adopting the stamp duty value as on 18-02-2013; otherwise, the original computation may stand.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes with a direction for de novo verification on the limited issue of the applicable stamp duty valuation date.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT SURAT

Pratish Shah(HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)

This appeal is field by the assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “CIT(A)”) dated 12.08.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 in the proceeding u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Vijayakumar Shetty
Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: Shetty & Co, Chartered Accountants, Mangalore
Location: Mangalore, Karnataka
Articles Published: 6,312

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.