NITIN GOEL,PARWANOO V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 1071/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Nitin Goel against the additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning unexplained foreign tour and household expenses for the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17. The ITSC had previously accepted a surrender of certain amounts by the assessee's father, which included specific allocations for the assessee. Despite this, the Assessing Officer made similar additions during reassessment, which were upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the additions regarding foreign travel were not justified as they were already covered by the ITSC's decision, but it adjusted the household expenses addition based on reasonable estimation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705353 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: Shri Umesh Kumar Goel vs. ITSC, Smt. Radhika Goel vs. CIT(A)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TARUNDEEP KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI KUMAR; VIRTUAL MODE
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 69C

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1071 & 1072/Chd/ 2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Nitin Goel Plot No. 29, Sector-1, Parwanoo Himachal Pradesh-173220 बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AKSPG1615K अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA (Virtual Mode) राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, CIT, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25/06/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 30/06/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: Both the above appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon each dt. 23/08/2024. We are taking the ITA No. 1071/Chd…as lead appeal. 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [hereinafter \"Ld. CIT(A)\"] for the Assessment Year 2015-16, confirming the addition of ₹2,67,600/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Grounds of Appeal The assessee has challenged the additions made towards unexplained foreign tour expenses of ₹90,000/- and household expenses of ₹1,77,600/-, both of which were claimed to have been duly accounted for in the settlement petition filed by the assessee’s father before the Hon’ble Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC). 3. Brief Facts of the Case 3.1 The assessment was originally framed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 18.12.2017, wherein the above additions were made. These were contested up to the level of the ITAT, which remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer to consider additional evidence, particularly the order of the Hon’ble ITSC dated 31.03.2019. 3.2 The Hon’ble ITSC, in the case of Shri Umesh Kumar Goel (father of the assessee), accepted a surrender of ₹8,35,000/- towards foreign tour expenses and ₹8,00,000/- towards household expenses of the family for AYs 2010-11 to 2016-17. This included ₹80,000/- and ₹1,25,000/- specifically allocated for the assessee for the relevant year. 3.3 Despite this, the Assessing Officer in the reassessment proceedings again made the same additions, and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed them. 4. Submissions of the Assessee The Ld. AR submitted that the foreign tour and household expenses of the assessee were already disclosed by his father and accepted by the ITSC. The ITSC order is binding and conclusive, and the Assessing Officer could not make additions on the same facts. It was also submitted that the same issue was considered and relief was granted by the CIT(A) in the case of Smt. Radhika Goel (sister-in-law of the assessee) under similar circumstances. 5. Submissions of the Department The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the issue of foreign travel should be decided in light of the timing of the settlement period and the applicability of the ITSC findings for the specific year in question. It was argued that while some expenses were declared before the ITSC, the actual expenditure by the assessee still needed verification and attribution. As regards the household expenses, the Ld. DR submitted that the estimation made by the Assessing Officer appeared to be a reasonable exercise of discretion, considering that the assessee had started contributing to household expenses during the relevant period, and complete documentary evidence was not furnished. 6. Findings and Decision 6.1 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is undisputed that the assessee’s father, Shri Umesh Kumar Goel, had made a voluntary disclosure before the ITSC, which was accepted for the assessment year 2015-16. The Hon’ble ITSC had also directed an ad hoc addition of ₹20,000/- per year over and above the surrendered amounts for foreign travel to cover any estimation deficiencies. The Department has already acted upon the ITSC order in the case of the father. The ITSC proceedings are final and binding under Chapter XIX-A of the Act. 6.2 We, therefore, find merit in the assessee’s contention that once ₹80,000/- were disclosed in the settlement proceedings before the Settlement Commission and against the amount of Rs. 80,000/-, Rs. 20,000/- had been accepted then the lower authorities wee not justified in making fresh additions on the same counts except for the additional ₹20,000/- directed by the ITSC. Hence the addition made in respect of Foreign Travel Expenditure is hereby deleted. 6.3 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The issue pertains to the disallowance of household expenses made by the Assessing Officer, which were added to the income of the assessee on an estimated basis. It is observed that the Tribunal in the earlier round of proceedings had directed the Assessing Officer to decide the issue in accordance with the findings recorded by the Settlement Commission.However, it is pertinent to note that the Authorized Representative has not brought to our notice any material to demonstrate that the household expenditure of the assessee was the subject matter of proceedings before the Settlement Commission. On the contrary, it appears that only the household expenditure of the assessee’s father was considered in the settlement proceedings. 6.4 Considering the above and the fact that the addition made by the Assessing Officer is purely on an estimated basis, we are of the considered opinion that a reasonable estimation needs to be adopted. Accordingly, we restrict the disallowance to 75% of the amount originally added by the Assessing Officer. The assessee is granted a relief of 25% on this account. 6.5 In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 1072/Chd/ 2024 6.6 It is noted that the grounds raised in Appeal No. 1072/2024 are identical to those raised in Appeal No. 1071/Chd/2024. the addition made towards foreign travel expenditure is directed to be deleted, as the same is not sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case.The addition made towards household expenditure is restricted to a maximum of 75% of the total amount estimated by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the assessee is granted relief to the extent of 25% on this account. Therefore, following our own decision in that appeal, we partly allowe the assessee's appeal in the present year as well. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/06/2025 Sd/- Sd/- मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल लिलत क ुमार (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (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 1 Draft dictated Sr. P.S 2 Draft first placed before author Sr. P.S 3 Approved draft comes to Sr. PS/PS Sr. P.S 4 Final draft placed before author Sr. P.S 5 Order signed and pronounced on Sr. P.S "