DAI CHAND,KAITHAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAITHAL

ITA 936/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Dai Chand, against the order of the CIT(A), which confirmed the addition of Rs. 45,82,500 as unexplained income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was based on cash deposits in the assessee's bank account, which the Assessing Officer suspected to be unexplained income. The assessee contended that these deposits were part of the consideration received from the sale of ancestral agricultural land, as recorded in a registered sale deed. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, finding insufficient evidence to substantiate the assessee's claim. The Tribunal, however, noted the immediate correlation between the sale deed and the bank deposits and remanded the matter for verification of the sale deed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780640 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: PULKIT SAINI
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 148; 144; 69; 234B

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी क ृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 936/Chd/ 2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dai Chand S/o Nanhu Ram, Karnal Road, Dhand, Kaithal136020, Haryana बनाम The ITO Ward-1, Kaithal ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ASVPC3682M अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Pulkit Saini, Advocate राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07/10/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dt. 22/05/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal against the impugned assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s 147, determining the income of assessee at Rs. 45,86,500/-. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the jurisdictional notice u/s 148 is against the provisions of the Act as no income has escaped assessment. 3. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the documentary evidences produced by the assessee while sustaining the addition of Rs. 45,82,500 u/s 69 of the Act. 4. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the ld. AO failed to provide the basic exemption limit while assessing the income. 5. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the ex-parte addition without granting adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. That the assessment order is null and void as the same is in violation of CBDT circular no.19/2019 mandating DIN. Printed from counselvise.com 2 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in initiating the penalty provisions of section 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income declaring a small taxable income. During the scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed cash deposits aggregating to Rs.45,82,500/- in the bank account of the assessee. When called upon to explain, the assessee submitted that the deposits represented part of the consideration received from the sale of ancestral agricultural land. It was contended that the sale deed clearly recorded that the assessee had received Rs.55,00,000/- in cash from the purchaser. 2.1 The Assessing Officer, however, was not satisfied. In the absence of independent verification of the sale deed and considering that the assessee had failed to establish a direct nexus between the deposits and the land sale, the AO treated the sum of Rs.45,82,500/- as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), after considering the submissions, observed that the assessee had not furnished cogent evidence before the Assessing Officer to establish that the bank deposits were out of land-sale consideration. The CIT(A) was of the view that the mere assertion of receipt of cash would not suffice unless substantiated with reliable documentation and verification. Accordingly, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was confirmed. 4. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR reiterated that the registered sale deed categorically records receipt of Rs.55,00,000/- in cash by the assessee. It was argued that once a registered instrument evidences receipt of sale consideration, the source of deposits is explained. Printed from counselvise.com 3 5.1 It was further submitted that the assessee is prepared to produce a certified copy of the sale deed before the Assessing Officer, and once such verification is carried out, the addition would not survive. Ld. AR had also filed the application for accepting the additional evidence in this regard. It was therefore pleaded that the matter be restored to the file of the AO with necessary direction. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. He argued that the assessee had not produced any certified copy of the sale deed before the AO or the CIT(A), and the claim of cash receipt remained unverified. 6.1 The DR further contended that unless the genuineness of the transaction recorded in the deed is properly examined, the possibility of introducing unaccounted income cannot be ruled out. It was therefore submitted that the order of the CIT(A) be upheld. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and examined the material available on record. The assessee has produced before us a copy of the registered sale deed which mentions receipt of Rs.55,00,000/- in cash. Prima facie, there exists an immediate correlation between the consideration recorded in the sale deed and the bank deposits of Rs.45,82,500/-. 7.1 At the same time, we note that no verification of the certified copy of the sale deed has been carried out by the lower authorities. In these circumstances, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a limited direction. 7.2 The Assessing Officer shall verify whether the certified copy of the registered sale deed indeed records the receipt of Rs.55,00,000/- in cash. In case the assessee produces such certified copy and the fact of cash receipt is confirmed, then the source of deposits would stand explained, and the addition sustained by the lower authorities shall be deleted. 7.3 In view of the above, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer with the Printed from counselvise.com 4 directions aforesaid. The appeal of the assessee is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- क ृणवȶ सहाय लिलत क ुमार (KRINWANT SAHAY) (LALIET KUMAR) लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "