Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sophia Mushtaq Panirwala Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2020-21
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sophia Mushtaq Panirwala Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Sec 56(2)(vii)(b) Addition on Stamp Duty Value – Ignoring Co-ownership DVO Request, ITAT Remands The assessee jointly purchased a property with her son (50% share each) for ₹2.86 Cr, whereas stamp duty value was ₹5.15 Cr. The AO added the entire difference of ₹2.28 Cr u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) in assessee’s hands, treating it as income from other sources. Further, AO also invoked Sec 69 r.w.s. 115BBE for unexplained investment, alleging lack of proper explanation.  CIT(A) upheld the additions citing non-submission of details. Before ITAT, it wa...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Delay Condoned with Cost: ITAT Grants Fresh Chance, Slams Non-Compliance Section 153C Valid but Addition Fails: No Incriminating Material = No Deemed Dividend 870-Day Delay Not Condoned: ITAT Refuses Relief, Calls Out Negligence & “No Sufficient Cause” Wrong Section Claim Not Fatal: ITAT Remands Matter & Nullifies Penalty Penalty U/s 270A Quashed: No Specific Charge of “Misreporting” = No Penalty View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031