The Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has removed a tax addition of about ₹80 lakh in a case involving a property purchase said to have been financed by an NRI husband. The ruling gives relief to a woman taxpayer who had faced an addition under Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, a provision used for unexplained investments.
According to the tribunal’s view, the tax department could not treat the investment as unexplained solely because one remittance document was not available. The order indicates that the broader transaction was supported by reliable material, and that the absence of a single paper was not enough to justify the addition.
The case is notable because Section 69 disputes often turn on whether the source of money has been satisfactorily explained. Here, the tribunal appears to have accepted that the property deal and the flow of funds were backed by credible evidence, even though the documentation set was not complete in every respect.
The decision highlights an important point for taxpayers in property transactions involving overseas family funds: tax authorities must consider the full evidentiary record rather than focusing only on one missing remittance proof. In this matter, that approach led the Mumbai ITAT to delete the ₹80.10 lakh addition.
