Himanshu Kukreja Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Property Bought in Individual Name, Paid by Society = Taxable Gift: ITAT Delhi Upholds ₹8.64 Cr Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)
Delhi ITAT (Dehradun Bench), in Himanshu Kukreja vs. ITO (ITA No.147/Del/2024, AY 2016-17, order dated 23.12.2025), dismissed the assessee’s appeal and upheld addition of ₹8,64,15,000 u/s 56(2)(vii)(b), treating the immovable property received without consideration as taxable income in the hands of the individual assessee.
The Assessee purchased land admeasuring 18,010.8 sq. mtrs. at Dehradun through two registered sale deeds dated 22.06.2015, for a total consideration of ₹8.64 crore. Though the entire purchase consideration and stamp duty were paid by Kulwant Kaur Kukreja Educational Society, the sale deeds, title and revenue records stood exclusively in the assessee’s individual name.
Originally, the AO had accepted the assessee’s explanation that the land was purchased on behalf of the society. However, the Pr. CIT invoked s.263, holding that there was lack of enquiry, possible violation of s.13(1)(c), and that the assessee had received property without consideration, attracting s.56(2)(vii). Pursuant thereto, reassessment was framed making the impugned addition, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
The Tribunal noted that:
– No mention was made in the sale deeds that the property was purchased for or on behalf of the society;
– No resolution, authorization or contemporaneous document existed empowering the assessee to buy land for the society;
– The Memorandum of Understanding dated 21.12.2018 relied upon by the assessee was executed nearly 3½ years after the purchase, and was held to be a mere afterthought;
– Even till the date of hearing, title and revenue records continued in the assessee’s name, and the property was not reflected as an asset in the society’s audited accounts.
In these facts, the ITAT held that the assessee had acquired absolute ownership in his personal capacity, while the society had funded the purchase, resulting in receipt of immovable property without consideration. Accordingly, provisions of s.56(2)(vii)(b) were rightly invoked, and the addition of ₹8.64 crore was confirmed. The appeal was dismissed
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
