KSHAMA SANJAY TRIPATHI,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 450/AHD/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Kshama Sanjay Tripathi, the appellant, who contested the additions made to her income by the Income Tax Officer regarding unexplained investments and expenditures for the Assessment Year 2010-11. Initially, the assessee was identified as a non-filer and was subjected to a reopened assessment based on information about property purchase and cash deposits. The CIT(A) removed the addition concerning cash deposits but enhanced the assessment by adding Rs. 2,10,000 for unexplained expenditure. The Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, including bank statements and family testimonies, found that the sources of the funds were legitimate and properly documented, leading to the allowance of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25286 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIGNESH DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL K PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Unexplained investment
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. No.450/Ahd/2020 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Kshama Sanjay Tripathi, 76, Super Bunglow, Science City, Sola Road, Ahmedabad-380060. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Ahmedabad. [PAN No.AFYPT1577L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul K Patel, AR Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.01.2025 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad vide order dated 10.10.2017 passed for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. That, on facts, and in law, the learned CIT (A) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 40, 00,000/- made as unexplained investment in purchase of property. ITA No. 450/Ahd/2017 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 2– 2. That on facts and in law, the learned CIT (A) has grievously erred in enhancing the assessment by making addition of Rs.2,10,000/- towards unexplained expenditure without issuing notice of enhancement as required by law. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, and amend any ground of appeal. 3. Facts of the case are that the assessee was identified as a non filer in the NMS [Non-filler Management System) who has not filed return of income for the A. Y. 2010-11. The AIR information on the ITD systems of the revenue in respect of the assessee was that the assessee had purchase of immovable property of Rs. 40,00,000/- and also made Cash Deposits in bank account of Rs. 17,58,500/- during the year under consideration. In view of above backdrop, the case was reopened and notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued on 29/03/2017 was sent through Speed post which was dully served to the assessee at the known address. Owing to the non-filing of the return, the assessment has been completed u/s.144 determining total income of Rs.40,00,000/- on account of purchase of property and Rs.17,58,500/-on account of cash deposits in the bank account. The assessee contested the additions before the Ld. CIT(A)., who has deleted the additions of Rs.17,58,500/- made on account of cash deposits in the bank account but enhanced the addition by Rs.Rs.2,10,000/- being unexplained expenditure 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR argued explaining the sources of Rs.40,00,000/- receive by the assessee for the purchase of property. ITA No. 450/Ahd/2017 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 3– 6. The Ld.AR explained that the assessee received the amount from the husband, father and family members and the sources have been aptly proved before the before the Ld. CIT(A) which he chooses to ignore. The details are tabulated as under: Sr. No Name Relation Amount (In Rs.) 1 Deb Brat Mishra Brother 28,50,000/- 2. Sanjay Tripathi Husband 4,90,000/- 3. Prabhakar Mishra Father 1,40,000/- 4. Yugal Kishore Tripathi Father-in-law 5,00,000/- 7. On the other hand the Ld.DR argued that the assessee could not filed any confirmation and creditworthiness of the person who have lend the monies. 8. We have gone through the bank statements of all the persons mentioned at page no.5, 6, 8, 20, 22, 32 to 34, 31 to 35 and 38 of the paper book which reflect lending of the monies by this parties to the assessee. All these monies have been received from the family members and due evidences have been furnished before the revenue authorities and no adverse inference could be drawn about the sources of these monies against of the assessee as the assessee has duly discharged the primary onus of proving the sources. Hence the appeal of the assessee on ground no.1 is hereby allowed. With regard to the enhancement on account of unexplained expenditure, on going through the record we find no reason for such enhancement and especially in the absence on any issue of notice to the assessee. ITA No. 450/Ahd/2017 Asst.Year –2010-11 - 4– 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 24.01.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 24.01.2025 Manish, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "