RAKESH GUPTA,GREATER NOIDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5936/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that there was no receipt or evidence presented to substantiate the addition. The lower authorities relied solely on alleged information without proper reconciliation or substantiation, finding no merit in the impugned addition.

What were the facts?

The Revenue added Rs. 21,01,200/- to the assessee's income, representing capitation fees/donation payments made to M/s Santosh Medical College. This addition was based on information unearthed during a search at the medical college's premises, leading to reassessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made to the assessee's income, based on information from a search at a third party without proper substantiation, is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 29.05.2025Pronounced: 29.05.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Rakesh Gupta, Vs Income Tax Officer, 103, Sea Court Tower-3, Jaypee Ward-2(2)(2), Greens, Alpha, Greater Noida, S.O. Ghaziabad, Kasana, Uttar Pradesh-201310 Uttar Pradesh-201009 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEKPG9369J Assessee by : Sh. Neelesh Kumar Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 29.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.05.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069918416(1) dated 24.10.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Learned departmental representative vehemently argues at the outset that both the lower authorities have rightly added the assessee’s capitation fee/donation payments of Rs.21,01,200/-; made to the searched party M/s Santosh Medical College, Ghaziabad, which was unearthed during the course of search in the latter’s case leading to initiation of

4.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s vehement rival submissions reiterating their respective stands. A perusal of the case file reveals that there is not even a receipt alleged to have been signed by either the assessee or recipient delay reconciled with the corresponding admission’s details which could substantiate the impugned addition made in the assessee’s hands. All what both the learned lower authorities have done is to go by some alleged information only which has never been light of the day. That being the case, I find no merit in the impugned addition which is hereby deleted in very terms.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →