AMIT ANAND,CHANDIGARH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 1246/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Amit Anand against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the additions made by the AO regarding unexplained money amounting to Rs. 3.91 Lacs. The AO had reopened the assessee's case alleging that this amount was paid for a property purchase and was not disclosed in the income return. The assessee contended that the payment was made by his late father, who had managed the assessee's investments. The Tribunal found that the source of the payment was adequately explained and thus deleted the additions. Additionally, the Tribunal noted an inconsistency in the income figures calculated by the AO and directed a re-computation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361253 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: VINEET KRISHAN LD
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.1246/CHANDI/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Amit Anand H.No.2175/A, Sector 38-C Chandigarh. बनाम/ Vs. ITO Ward 2(1) Chandigarh-160017. ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AGBPA-0901-D (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh Vineet Krishan (Advocate) – Ld. AR ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 28-12-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144B r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 16-09.2021. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2 2. The assessee declared income of Rs.3.97 Lacs in regular return of income. However, the case was reopened on 19-03-2020 on the allegation that the assessee purchased a property from M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. and made payment of Rs.3.91 Lacs which was not disclosed in the return of income. The assessee refuted the allegation of Ld. AO on the ground that the impugned payment was made by his late father who was running consultancy business and looking after assessee’s investments. It was also stated that the assessee paid advance of Rs.4 Lacs during FY 2011-12 to his father which was duly reflected in the Balance Sheet. The earnest money of Rs.3.91 Lacs was stated to be paid by his father. However, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.3.91 Lacs in the hands of the assessee as unexplained money u/s 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. Upon perusal of ITR-4 as filed by the assessee on 31-03-2014, it could be seen that the assessee has reflected loans (assets) for Rs.5 Lacs in the return of income. Similar amount has been reflected in return filed on 28-05-2021 during reassessment proceedings. The same apparently include the cash loan of Rs.4 Lacs as given by the assessee to his father in earlier years. The same is also reflected in the Balance Sheet as on 31-03-2012 as extracted in the impugned order. The perusal of loan ledger extract would show that this is cash loan and accordingly, the same would not appear in the bank statement of the assessee. On these facts, in our considered opinion, the claim of the assessee is to be accepted. The source of earnest money of 3 Rs.3.91 Lacs stood fully explained. Therefore, we delete the impugned additions as made by Ld. AO. It is seen that in the assessment order, Ld. AO has computed total income of Rs.7.89 Lacs but in the computation sheet, the total income has been computed as Rs.11.86 Lacs and there is apparent discrepancy between the two. Accordingly, Ld. AO is directed to re-compute the correct income of the assessee. 4. The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 22-05-2025. Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22-05-2025. आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH "