ANJANI ARJUN RANA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1,INTL. TAXN., AHMEDABAD

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

Addition the of Rs.4,04,300/- u/s 69 of the Act: The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Non-Resident Individual. Information was received by the Department through the Insight Portal that the assessee had purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.82,50,000/-. Accordingly, the assessment was reopened by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee filed her return of income declaring total income at Nil. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer accepted the source of the purchase consideration but treated the stamp duty payment of Rs.4,04,300/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act on the ground that the assessee failed to substantiate the source thereof with supporting documentary evidence. The explanation of the assessee was that the stamp duty was paid out of cash received from her father-in-law, Dr. Gauri Shankar Prasad, a retired medical practitioner, whose Income-tax Return was also furnished to establish his financial capacity. However, since no confirmation or other corroborative evidence was produced, the Assessing Officer made the impugned addition.

Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Pained by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. AR submitted that the father-in-law, aged about 84 years, resides in Bihar and due to his advanced age and health issues, it was difficult to retrieve nearly nine-year-old records. It was submitted that the authorities below rejected the explanation without making any independent verification, despite the assessee having furnished the particulars of the father-in-law and his Income-tax Return. It was therefore prayed that one more opportunity be granted to substantiate the claim.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The only issue involved in the present appeal is regarding the source of payment of stamp duty of Rs.4,04,300/-. The assessee has consistently explained that the amount was received from her father-in-law and has also placed on record his Income-tax Return. However, the authorities below have rejected the explanation for want of confirmation and other supporting evidence. Considering the facts of the case, since the ITR of the father-in-law reflecting the identity of the lender, capability and genuineness of the transaction has been filed and not disputed by the Assessing Officer, we hold that no addition is called for in the hands of the assessee for the amount received

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Date of dictation … ……words processed by the Hon’ble VP on his PC On …14.08.1016… 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member ………14.08.2026 3. Other Member…………19.08.2026…. 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S………….19.08.2026… 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement……20.08.2026 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S…........20.08.2026 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk ………20.08.2026 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order……………………………………