SUMITA SETHI (ALSO KNOWN AS SUMITA MALIK UPON MARRIAGE),DUBAI (UAE) V. DCIT/ACIT-INT-TAX, GURGAON

ITITA 926/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sumita Sethi @ Sumita Malik, who appealed against the order of the Learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO) concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The Ld. AO had made an addition of Rs.73,49,215 under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing unexplained investments in immovable property. The appellant contested the addition, arguing violations of natural justice and incorrect assessments of unexplained income. The Tribunal, after considering the additional evidence provided by the appellant, decided to set aside the Ld. AO's order and remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 823049 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: EKTA JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: AKASH SARAF
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice; Competent authority
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A No. 926/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sumita Sethi @ Sumita Malik, House No. 181 Sector 14, Urban Estate, Karnal -131 001 Haryana Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, INT. Tax. Gurgaon (Haryana) PAN: BPLPS9878F (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against order dated 21.12.2024 of Learned Assessing Officer/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. AO\") under Sections 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) for assessment year 2015-16. Assessee by Shri Akash Saraf, CA Department by Ms. Ekta Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 23.12.2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 926/Del/2025 2. Brief facts of the case are that in the case of assessee, certain information was flagged In the case of the assessee, certain information was flagged as per Risk Management Strategy formulated by the CBDT on ITBA portal under the head 'NMS cases'. As per information, the assessee had invested in immovable property to the tune of Rs.73,49,215/- during financial year 2014-16 relevant to assessment year 2015-16. As the assessee had not filed any return of income for financial year 2014-16 relevant to assessment year 2015-16, assessment proceedings under Sections 147/148 of the Act, 1961 were initiated by passing order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act on 06.04.2022 after obtaining necessary approval of the Competent Authority under Section 151 of the Act. The notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and delivered electronically through ITBA system. In response to the notice under Section 148, the assessee filed her ITR on 20.03.2022. Subsequent notices under Section 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee from time to time vide which the assessee was requested to furnish the details of sources of above mentioned investments/transactions. In response to 142(1) of the Act dated 02.05.2023, assessee filed her reply on 10.05.2023. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 21.12.2024 made addition of Rs.73,49,215/- under Section 69 of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, appellant/assessee preferred present appeal with following grounds: Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 926/Del/2025 “1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law the Ld. AO has erred in determining the assessable income of the Assessee at INR 14,02,566/- as against the returned income of INR 39,071/- by making an addition of INR 13,63,495/-. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law the Ld. AO/Hon'ble DRP has erred in violating principal of natural justice by not giving the Appellant opportunity being heard for providing for the alleged unexplained income of INR 13,63,495/-. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in holding that the amount paid by the 3 Assessee as consideration for purchase of immovable property amounting to INR 13,63,495/- is unexplained and is liable to tax in India. 4. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section-271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. The Appellant prays that appropriate relief be granted based on the above grounds of appeal and the facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. At the time of hearing, Learned authorized Representative for the appellant/assessee submitted application for admission of additional evidence along with copies of bank statements. 5. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue gave no objection to the application. 6. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that appellant/assessee has filed application for additional evidence along with bank statement in the appeal in support of grounds of appeal. In view of above material facts, in the interest of justice, impugned order dated Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 926/Del/2025 21.12.2024 of Ld. AO is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. AO for passing of fresh order in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( M BALAGANESH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (VIMAL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23rd December, 2025. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "