SARVAT KHANAM,MUZAFFARNAGAR V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

ITA 5653/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sarvat Khanam, the appellant, who contested an addition of Rs. 47 lakhs to her income for the assessment year 2012-13, as per the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. The addition was based on the AO's finding that the source of Rs. 47 lakhs deposited in the assessee's bank account was unexplained. The assessee, a widow and rustic villager, claimed that the amount was part of the sale proceeds from agricultural land, which was sold for Rs. 1,05,00,000. The Tribunal noted the procedural inadequacies in the AO's handling of the case, particularly the lack of inquiry into the affidavit provided by the assessee, and emphasized the need for a thorough investigation, given the assessee's limited understanding and the complexity of the transactions involved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706989 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2024
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMAR JAISWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: APARNA TRIPATHI

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5653/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sarvat Khanam, Garhi Hasanpur, Nai Nagla, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh – 247 773 PAN: IYYPK2666E Vs CIT, NFAC, Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Aparna Tripathi, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. 2. At the outset, the ld. AR has pointed out about the delay of seven days in filing the appeal and submitted that a condonation application in that regard has been filed. Considering that the delay is not of a substantial period, the same is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. ITA No.5653/Del/2024 2 3. On hearing both the sides, we find that the assessment order has been passed on the basis that the case of the assessee was reopened as it came into the knowledge of the AO that the assessee had deposited a cash amount of Rs.1,05,00,000/- in the savings bank account. The AO concluded that the assessee had a valid source to the extent of Rs.58 lakhs only which was by way of sale consideration received on account of sale of agricultural land, but, with regard to Rs.47 lakhs, there was no explanation. Therefore, an addition of Rs.47 lakhs was made. The ld. AR has submitted that the assessee is a rustic villager and was not aware as to what was transacted by her husband and written in the sale deed and the land was actually sold for Rs.1,05,00,000/- and the assessee’s husband had received Rs.45 lakh at the time of agreement while Rs.60 lakh was received at the time of sale which have been deposited by him in the bank. The affidavit of the assessee filed before the AO is on record wherein the assessee had deposed that she is a widow and her husband had died on 04.08.2014 and the ancestral land was sold for Rs.1,05,00,000/- to Raghubir Singh and Baljeet Singh of Karnal, Haryana and that earlier, on 05.08.2011 her husband had entered into an agreement to sell and received Rs.45 lakhs which was deposited in the bank account on 27.08.2011. Thereafter, when the sale deed was made on 14.11.2011, then also Rs.60 lakh was received, but, the sale deed as got executed somehow got mentioned receipt of Rs.58 lakhs which was deposited on 14.11.2011 in the bank account. This affidavit dated 17.12.2019 seems to have been given no credence by the AO. ITA No.5653/Del/2024 3 4. Now, being a quasi judicial authority, the ld. AO should have rebutted the on oath statement of the assessee in the form of affidavit by some inquiry and the most appropriate persons to be questioned were the purchasers. When an assessee is admitting that its income was by way of sale of agricultural land, then, some inquiry should have been made from the purchaser too to show otherwise. Especially when the assessee is an illiterate women there is onerous duty on the tax officers to make an inquiry to ensure that the assessee like the present rustic widow does not suffers from lack of knowledge or misrepresentation of facts. 5. Thus, we consider it an appropriate case to restore the issues on merits as well as on law to the files of the ld. AO who shall take into consideration the affidavit of the assessee and make further inquiries especially from the purchasers and pass an order afresh after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 09th July, 2025. dk ITA No.5653/Del/2024 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "