The Tribunal carefully analysed the submissions and observed that the assessee had submitted all the required documents to prove that the property was bought by her husband.
Nidhi | Nov 12, 2025 |
No Income Tax Addition for Unexplained Investment on Wife When Husband Funded Property Purchase: ITAT
In an important order, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai, ruled in favour of an assessee and deleted the addition made by the Revenue.
The income tax department, based on the information received on the Non-Filers Monitoring System (NMS) department regarding a purchase of an immovable property amounting to Rs 9,45,00,000 , issued a notice under section 148 on 31.03.2021, to the assessee, Amishi Mihir Doshi, requiring her to file the Income Tax Return (ITR). To which the assessee replied that her husband has already reflected it in his ITR.
The assessee submitted that she is a joint owner of a property which has been bought by her husband from his explained sources. She submitted that her husband had paid the whole consideration of the property, and it has also been declared in his return. However, in the reply, the assessee did not submit any bank statement that proves the payment was made by her husband. As a result, the Assessing officer treated this as an unexplained investment under section 68 of the Income Tax Act and made an addition of the entire amount (Rs 9,45,00,000).
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), which allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the addition. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai.
The assesse submitted copies of the replies filed by her to the assessing officer, along with the required documents, including a copy of her husband’s ITR, his bank statement showing the proof of payments made during FY 2014-15, a copy of Form 26AS, Purchase Agreement, etc. Her husband had also deducted 1% TDS, which was also shown in his 26AS statement.
The Tribunal carefully analysed the submissions and observed that the assessee had submitted all the required documents to prove that the property was bought by her husband, and the assessee’s name was just added as a co-owner. Based on these facts, the ITAT upheld the decision of CIT(A) and rejected the appeal filed by the revenue.
In case of any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]
Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"
