DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA V. MANU GUPTA, DHURI

ITA 202/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the revenue against the decision of the CIT(A) which had deleted the addition of unexplained investment made by the AO in the hands of Shri Rohit Gupta and Shri Manu Gupta, respectively. The addition pertained to an alleged on-money payment of Rs. 77.27 Lacs for a property transaction involving HBPL, a real estate company. The Tribunal referenced its previous decisions in similar cases involving HBPL, where it had allowed the appeals of the assessee and dismissed the appeals of the revenue, leading to the dismissal of the current appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783895 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Homelife Buildcon Private Ltd. (ITA Nos.880/Chd/2024 & ors. order dated 17-07-2025), M/s HBPL (ITA Nos.880/Chd/2024 & 1036/Chd/2024 order dated 17-07-2025), Shri Balwinder Singh (ITA No.188/Chd/2025 order dated 03-09-2025)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHISHEK PAL GARG LD. VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUDHIR SEH GAL LD
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Fair market value
• Section: 143(3); 132

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.201/CHANDI/2025 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2022-23) DCIT Central Circle-1 Ludhiana बनाम/ Vs. Shri Rohit Gupta C/o Gupta Textile Trading Co. Old Anaj Mandi, Dhuri, Punjab-148024 ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ACAPG-4615-M (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) 2. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.202/CHANDI/2025 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2022-23) DCIT Central Circle-1 Ludhiana बनाम/ Vs. Shri Manu Gupta C/o Gupta Textile Trading Co. Old Anaj Mandi, Dhuri, Punjab-148024 ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ACAPG-4616-J (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. AR Revenue by : Shri Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) -Ld. DR (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 28-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The facts in captioned twin appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 are admittedly identical. First, we take up revenue’s appeal ITA No. 201/Chandi/2025 which arises out of an order of learned Printed from counselvise.com 2 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana [CIT(A)] dated 13- 11-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. DCIT / ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana [AO] u/s 143(3) on 19-03-2024. The sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition of alleged payment of on- money for Rs.77.27 Lacs as unexplained investment as made by Ld. AO while framing the assessment against the assessee. The Ld. AR stated that the issue stand covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Homelife Buildcon Private Ltd. (ITA Nos.880/Chd/2024 & ors. order dated 17-07-2025). The copy of the same has been placed on record. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Proceedings before lower authorities 2.1 Pursuant to search action by the department u/s 132 in the case of M/s Home Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (HBPL) group of cases on 16-11-2021, the impugned assessment was framed. During search, various incriminating material were found and seized which indicated payment of on-money by the purchasers to HBPL. The assessee acted as one of the directors of HBPL. M/s HBPL is stated to be engaged in real estate business and developed a township by the name ‘Sunview Enclave’ in Ludhiana. 2.2 It was noted by Ld. AO that the assessee purchased SCO No.8 measuring 144.44 Square Yards in the said project for Rs.22 Lacs from HBPL. In assessment proceedings of HBPL, it was noted that the fair market value of the residential plots / SCOs as sold by HBPL was much higher than the registered value of the said properties. By referring to assessment findings in the case of HBPL, Ld. AO noted that the saleable Printed from counselvise.com 3 value of the residential plots was determined at Rs.33,000/- per square Yards. Accordingly, the assessee was show-caused wherein Ld. AO proposed addition of alleged on-money. The assessee, vide its reply dated 15-03-2024, refuted the allegation of Ld. AO which did not find favor with Ld. AO. Going by the search findings and in the light of statements recorded therein, Ld. AO computed fair market value of the SCO at Rs.99.27 Lacs as against its registered value of Rs.22 Lacs and added the differential of Rs.77.27 Lacs as unexplained investment u/s 69B. 2.3 The Ld. CIT(A), considering first appeal order Appeal No.10241/2020-21/IT/CIT(A)-5/Ldh/2023-24 dated 19-07-2024 for AY 2021-22 in the case of recipient M/s HBPL, wherein similar additions were deleted, held that the impugned addition would not be sustainable. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 3. As righty pointed out by Ld. AR, we find that the assessee as well as revenue preferred further appeal against the decision of Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2021-22 in the case of HBPL before this Tribunal vide ITA Nos.880/Chd/2024 & 1036/Chd/2024 order dated 17-07-2025 wherein the appeal of the assessee was allowed whereas appeal of the revenue was dismissed. In other words, similar addition of alleged on-money in the case of recipient M/s HBPL stood ultimately deleted by the Tribunal. 4. We further find that by relying upon assessment proceedings of HBPL, Ld. AO made similar addition of alleged on-money in the case of another assessee i.e., Shri Balwinder Singh. However, considering the Printed from counselvise.com 4 first appeal order in the case of HBPL, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition so made by Ld. AO. The revenue preferred further appeal against the same vide ITA No.188/Chd/2025 which stood dismissed by Tribunal vide order dated 03-09-2025. The copy of the order has been placed on record. 5. We find that similar facts exist in the present appeal. The Ld. AO made addition in the hands of the assessee by referring to incriminating material and statements recorded during search proceedings in the case of HBPL for AY 2021-22. The addition stood deleted by Ld. CIT(A) by considering first appeal order in the case of HBPL. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Facts being pari-materia the same and following consistent stand of Tribunal, we would hold that the impugned addition as made by Ld. AO is not sustainable and accordingly the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) could not be faulted with. We order so. The appeal stand dismissed. 6. ITA No.202/Chandi/2025 : Shri Manu Gupta Facts in this appeal are pari-materia the same. The Ld. AO made addition of unexplained investment for Rs.77.27 Lacs which has been deleted by Ld. CIT(A) considering same appellate order in the case of HBPL. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. Facts being pari- materia the same, taking the same view, we upheld the order of Ld. CIT(A). This appeal also stand dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com 5 Conclusion 7. Both the appeals stand dismissed. Order pronounced on 10/11/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10/11/2025 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 Printed from counselvise.com "