DAXABEN N. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), VADODARA

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 26.07.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13.

ITA No.525/Ahd/2025 [Daxaben N. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 –

“1.00 Addition of Rs. 66,91,500/- as unexplained investment u/s 69B of the Act: 1.01 On the facts and circumstances of your appellant's case as well as in law, the ld. AO erred in making addition of Rs. 66,91,500/- towards purchase of Agriculture Land on the presumption that source of such investment unexplainable and hence income of your appellant u/s 69B of the Act. 1.02 Your appellant submits that ld. AO already made addition of Rs. 20,85,000/- separately for cash deposits in bank account which were utilized towards purchase of land in question and the addition made to that extent leads to double addition which the ld. AO failed to appreciate. 1.03 Your appellant submits that ld. CIT(A) also failed to appreciate these facts and confirmed the addition made by Id. AO on plea that your appellant failed to furnish the underlying documents. 1.04 Your appellant prays Your Honour to hold so now and direct the ld. AO to delete addition made. 2.00 Addition of Rs. 20,85,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act: 2.01 On the facts and circumstances of your appellant's case as well as in law, the ld. AO erred in making addition of cash deposits in bank account on the presumption that they all are unexplainable and hence income of your appellant u/s 69A of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by ld. AO on plea that your appellant failed to furnish the underlying documents. 2.02 Your appellant prays Your Honour to hold so now and direct the ld. AO to delete addition made.”

ITA No.525/Ahd/2025 [Daxaben N. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 –

unexplained investment towards purchase of agriculture land and further of the addition of Rs.20,85,000/- as unexplained cash credits in the bank accounts of the assessee.

3.1 The appeal is barred by 158 days. Further, in this case, the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) as well as before the CIT(A).

3.2 The AO noticed that the assessee had made investment towards purchase of agriculture land worth Rs.60 Lakhs and also paid stamp duty and registration charges of Rs.6,91,500/-, total investment being of Rs.66,91,500/- and further that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.20,85,000/- in her bank account. Since, despite several notices, the assessee did not file any reply or explanation explaining the source of the said investment and deposits in the bank account, the AO made addition totaling to Rs.87,76,500/- and added the same to the income of the assessee holding the same as ‘income from unexplained sources’.

3.3 Even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not file any reply despite several opportunities given by the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition so made by the AO.

3.4 However, it is observed that one of the ground taken by the assessee before the CIT(A) was that the amount deposited in the

ITA No.525/Ahd/2025 [Daxaben N. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 4 –

bank account of Rs.20,85,000/- was further utilized for the purchase of agriculture land in question and, therefore, there was a double addition to the extent of Rs.20,85,000/- as the said amount has already been considered towards unexplained sources for the purchase of agriculture land.

3.5 Though, before us, no plausible reason has been given in the application for condonation of delay, however, considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the present appeal is, hereby, condoned.

ITA No.525/Ahd/2025 [Daxaben N. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 5 –

observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order is pronounced on 03/08/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 03/08/2026 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. �वभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad