SATYAVEER,BHARATPUR vs. BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

Briefly stated, facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are : During the scrutiny assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). The AO noticed that the assessee had purchased an immovable property on 15.12.2015 for a consideration of Rs. 13,14,000/- comprised in Khasra No. 115/347 Rakwa 0.6 Hectar, Anah, Tehsil and District Bharatpur on making payment of stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 79,140/-, total investment of Rs. 13,93,140/-, the AO initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee has not filed return of income nor submitted documents before the Assessing Officer, who has proceeded to opt for best judgments assessment and thereby made the entire addition of Rs. 13,93,140/- and framed assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A) who has partly allowed the appeal and sustained the unexplained money investment of Rs. 2,43,140/- .

Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 5. We have heard Ld. ARs for the appellant and Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the record available on file. 6. Undisputedly, the assessee has purchased the land during the year under consideration by investing an amount of Rs. 13,93,140/- out of which he had paid Rs. 9,50,000/- through banking channels by receiving Rs. 5,00,000/- from two creditors and claimed the remaining amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- out of accumulated savings in order to explain the balance amount of Rs. 2,43,140/-. 7. Ld. AR for the assessee contended that the assessee is working in a private sector and was having the accumulated saving of Rs. 2,43,140/-. The assessee is 38 years old as is apparent from the record and if taken to have started earning at the age of 25 years, during 13 years of period it is reasonable for a man ordinary prudence who is interested in purchasing immovable property to have accumulated saving of Rs. 2,43,140/-. So in these circumstances, we are of the considered view that accumulated savings by the assessee are taken as duly proved and as such addition of Rs. 2,43,140/- sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is ordered to be deleted.

Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-08-2026