NIDHI GOYAL,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 103/JPR/2026 (Assessment Year:2019-20)

Nidhi Goyal Vs. DCIT Kalani & Co LLP, Central Circle Chartered Accountants, 5th Kota Floor, Milestone Building, Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:ANIPJ 9089 R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. P.C. Parwal, CA Respondent by : Mrs. Aarti Rawat, JCIT Date of Hearing 16.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 04.08.2026 O R D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT(A), Udaipur 02(hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 11.11.2025 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

P a g e | 2 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the validity of notice issued u/s 153C of IT Act, 1961 and the consequent order passed by the AO. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,89,500/- u/s 69 of IT Act, 1961 on account of alleged cash paid for purchase of flat in the project Royal Palm even when no evidence of any receipt indicating payment of such amount was found in search of Friends SPS Group, Kota and neither the copy of the statement of the concerned person of the group OR the opportunity to cross examine such person was provided. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition relying on the excel sheet containing details of 55 flats which was not found in search but subsequently got prepared from the searched person on 03.08.2019 while in the satisfaction note different amounts are mentioned and therefore making the addition relying on such excel sheet is unjustified and unwarranted. 4. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal. 5. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee. 3. In ground no.1 the assessee has challenged the validity of the assessment framed u/s 153C of the Act. 4. One of the contentions raised challenging the validity of the assessment so framed isas that the AO had assumed jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Act without any application of mind at all. In this regard, he contended that the facts based on which theAO assumed jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 153C of the Act were different from the facts recorded by him while framing assessment in the case of the assessee. 5. To substantiate his contention, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the proceedings, u/s 153C of the Act was initiated on the assessee on account of some incriminating material pertaining to the assessee being revealed on account of search action carried out u/s 132 of the Act on 01.08.2019 in the case of Friends SPS Group

P a g e | 3 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal Kota.The incriminating material allegedly revealed on-money to have been paid by the purchasers of flats to the said builder.The list of beneficiaries included the name of the assessee’s husband also. In this regard, he pointed out that the AO of the searched person recorded his satisfaction with regard to incriminating material found in relation to the assessee, as required u/s 153C of the Act for initiation of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, and reproduced the list in his satisfaction note of all the persons who were revealed in the search action to have made on-money payment in cash to the searched assessee/builder on account of flat purchased from him. He contended that the assessee’s husband name was listed at serial No.18 of the list reproduced in the satisfaction note mentioning theassessee’s husband name i.e. Ronak Agarwalfor Flat No.B-903, and stated the sale consideration as per agreement to be Rs.53,99,520/-, while the actual sale consideration to be Rs.63,21,000/- and therefore, the cash payment made being Rs.9,21,480/-. He drew my attention to the satisfaction note of the AO of the searched person placed before me atpaper book page No.10 to 12 more particularly to page No.11, listing all the beneficiaries and mentioning the facts relating to the assessee as pointed out above at serial No.18 as under:- On the basis of the documents seized during the search and survey operation, the information related to payment of on-money in cash by the individual purchasers-are- those-who were not covered under search/survey but it is clear from documents that these individuals paid on money in cash from their undisclosed income. The details of such purchasers (indicated in bold letter of column No. 3/name of purchasers) with Flat No., Date of sale Agreement, Sales consideration as per agreement, actual consideration and difference amount are summarized as under:-

P a g e | 4 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal

P a g e | 5 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal 6. He thereafter pointed out, that the AO of the assessee, recorded his satisfaction for assuming jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 153C of the Act assuming different facts that the assessee had purchased the flat jointly with Mr. Ronak Agarwal and her contribution in the on money accordingly was half of that found and recorded originally by the AO of the searched person . The satisfaction note of the AO of the assessee was placed before me at paper book page No.14 and 15, the contents of which are reproduced hereunder:- In this case an information has been passed by the Dy. Commissioner of income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vide his letter No. DCIT/CC-Kota/2022-23/515 dated 17.01.2023 which contain information in respect of the above assesse Smt. Nidhi Goyal (PAN- AGSPG6539JM) In the said information it is informed that notice u/s 153C of the IT Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2014-15 to 2020-21 are to be issued for the purpose of assessment and reassessment of income of the above assesse in accordance with provision of section 153A of the IT Act. Details of the said information of the above assesse are as under:- 2. A search action was carried out u/s 132 of the IT Act on 01.08.2019 in the case of Friends SPS Group, Kota. During the search proceedings, various incriminating documents had been found and seized from the residence of Shri SatnarayanGarg, Director of M/s Friends SPS International (India) Pvt. Ltd. Kota as well as different premises which are related to Project Royal Palm. On perusal of these incriminating documents, it is noticed that M/s YashAkshaya Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Friends SPS International (India) Pvt. Ltd. were jointly involved in real-estate business. M/s Yash Akshaya Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. is land owner in project 'Royal Palm' and M/s Friends SPS International (India) Pvt. Ltd. is developer of the project. Both the companies have developed a residential project 'Royal Palm. 3. During search proceedings, many incriminating documents were found and seized in which concrete evidences of tax evasion is evident. During the post search investigation, on the basis of such incriminating documents, it is clearly established that part sale consideration of flats sold was received in cash and same has not been recorded by both of the companies in Project Royal Palm i.e. M/s Friends SPS International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Yash Akshaya Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Sales consideration shown in agreement is less than actual sales considerations received by the companies. The companies have shown only the agreement value of the flats in the books of account and cash sales consideration have not been shown by them in their books of account. In the case of M/s Friends SPS International (India) Pvt. Ltd., the assessee company has

P a g e | 6 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal accepted this modus operandi and offered the unaccounted cash receipts for taxation. It is quite clear that the purchasers of the flats of Royal Palm Project have paid the on- money in cash from their undisclosed income. There are many pages/documents related to the purchasers, which establishes that the purchasers have paid actual deal amount, which is more than the agreement value of sale. Considering the documents seized during the search and Survey operation and reply submitted by the assessee during the post search proceeding, it is evident that the purchasers of the flats have paid cash amount and invested huge unaccounted cash in flats as on-money.

On the basis of the documents seized during the search and survey operation, the Information related to payment of on-money in cash by the individual purchasers are those were not covered under search/survey but it is clear from documents/details providedby the DCIT, Central Circle, Kota that theassesse had purchased flat in joint name with one other person namely Sh. Ronak Goyal (PAN AGSPG6539J) and had paid on-money in cash from their undisclosed income. The details of the above purchaser, with Flat No., Date of sale Agreement, Sales consideration as per agreement, actual consideration and difference amount are summarized as under:

P a g e | 7 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal out from para 12.3 of the order that the AO reproduced the scanned copy of the list prepared from the incriminating documents found during search, and which mentioned the name of the assessee along with another person as joint purchaser of property at Serial No.37. He further pointed out, that in this list, the actual consideration was mentioned at Rs.70 lakhs as opposed to Rs.63,21,000/- mentioned both in the list reproduced in the satisfaction recorded by the AO of the searched person and also in the satisfaction note recorded by the AO of the assessee. The figure of purchase consideration, he pointed out also varied, with the satisfaction notes recording an amount of Rs.53,99,520/- while the AO in his order noting purchase consideration to be Rs.48,21,000/-. 12.4 The assessee's contention that, no "on-money" payment of Rs. 21,79,000/- was made to the builder or any person by the assessee and no such agreement of Rs.70,00,000/- was ever been made by the assessee as alleged. In this connection, it is stated that during the search and seizure operation carried out in the case of Friends SPS Group Kota on 01.08.2019, various incriminating documents were found and seized which were related to the payment of on money in cash made against the purchase of flats in Project Royal Palm by individual purchasers. The scanned copy of same are annexed as under-

P a g e | 8 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal

P a g e | 9 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal

On perusal of aforesaid seized documents, it is noticed that the same is related to payment received through cheque and cash by the SPS and YashAkshay (Partners of Royal Palm Project) against the sale of various flats in Royal Palm Projects. The name of assessee Shri Ronak Goyal husband of the assessee is also reflecting at Sr. No. 37. On perusal of this incriminating document, it is clear that the assessee had made cash payment of Rs.21,79,000/- against the purchased of flat No. B-903 in Royal Palm Project during the year under consideration. Hence, it is clear that the case has been selected for scrutiny u/s 153C of the Act on the basis of incriminating documents found and seized during the search proceedings conducted in the case of M/s Friends SPS Group, hence the contents of the assessee that no any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 related to the assessee is not acceptable in this case. Therefore, the reply of the assessee that the cash payment of Rs.21,79,000/- was not made against the purchase of flat is also not acceptable as same is evident from seized documents and assessee has not submitted any evidence which proves that above cash payment has not been made. Further during the course of assessment proceedings, on perusal of copy of registered sale deed, it is noticed that the assessee had jointly purchased the aforesaid flat along with her husband Shri RonakGoyal for a sale consideration of Rs.48,21,000/-& registry of the same has been made during the F.Y.2018-19 i.e. on 21.12.2018. However, the actual sale consideration was of Rs.70,00,000/-, as revealed form the seized documents. Hence, from the seized document, it is clear that the assessee along with her husband Shri RonakGoyalhad made payment of on money in cash amounting to Rs.21,79,000/-(70,00,000/- minus 48,21,000/-) against purchase of flat No. B-903in the project Royal Palm from their undisclosed source of income. Thus the share of undisclosed income of the assessee comes to Rs. 10,89,500/-(1/2 of Rs.21,79,000/-).

P a g e | 10 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal while in his satisfaction note the co-owner was noted to be Mr. Ronak Agarwal.

P a g e | 11 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal order. He pointed out, that while the satisfaction note of the AO of the searched person reproduced list of 50 persons, however, the satisfaction note of the AO of the assessee reproduced a list of 55 persons. 12. He stated therefore, that there was clear case of non-application of mind by the AO while issuing notice to the assessee, and assuming jurisdiction to frame assessment u/s 153C of the Act.

P a g e | 12 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal the searched person recorded the investigation to reveal the assessee to have purchased flat and to have paid on money of Rs.9,21,480/-, the AO of the assessee mentioned the name of another person , Mr. Ronak Agarwal as co purchaser of property along with the assessee. The AO however proceeded to frame assessment on the basis of different data allegedly revealed by the Investigation Wing disclosing the assessee’s husband alone to be co-owner/buyer of property Mr. Ronak Goyal and to have made on money payment of Rs.21,79,000/- with the figures of purchase consideration as per agreement and that actually paid, at complete variance with that recorded in the satisfaction notes.

P a g e | 13 ITA No.103/JPR/2026 Nidhi Goyal u/s 153C of the Act kept open for the assessee to take up the same if required at a later stage in accordance with law. 18. In effect, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04.08.2026

Sd/- (Annapurna Gupta) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 04.08.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur