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

ITAT Quashes U/s 153C Assessments: AO Cannot Simply Copy Satisfaction Note Reopening Quashed: AO Added Share Capital, Loan & Premium Without Understanding Transaction Nature WhatsApp Chats, Screenshots & Suspicion Can’t Prove On-Money: ITAT Jaipur ITAT Directs TDS Refund Despite Delayed E-Verification; Revenue Cannot Retain Tax on Technical Grounds ITAT Quashes Reassessment: Approval from PCIT Instead of PCCIT Renders Section 148 Notice Invalid 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930