KARAM VIR,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5880/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 July 2026AY 2021-224 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding the assessee's explanation for the seized cash to be without merit due to lack of supporting material. The addition made by the Assessing Officer was confirmed.

What were the facts?

Cash of Rs. 11,45,000/- was seized from a third party, who stated it belonged to the assessee. The assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation during assessment proceedings. Before the CIT(A), the assessee claimed the money was from accumulated agricultural income, which was rejected.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 11,45,000/- was justified in the absence of a satisfactory explanation from the assessee and whether the assessment proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 142(1),Section 269SS

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 25.06.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5880/Del/2025, A.Y. 2021-22 Karam Vir Vs. ACIT, H No. 40, Central Circle Block 4 Chhainsa, Faridabad Chhainsa, Faridabad, Ballabhgarh, Faridabad, Haryana India, 121006 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AXDPV5520E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sher Singh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 25.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 08.07.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 14.08.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 5880/Del/2025 Karam VIR

to as “the Act”) arising out of assessment order dated 31.03.2022 for A.Y. 2021-22.

2.

In the appeal, appellant/assessee raised following grounds:

“1. That the appellant denies its liability to be assessed at total income of Rs. 11,45,000/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, and interest demanded thereon. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in framing the impugned assessment order u/s 144, without assuming jurisdiction as per law, without serving valid notices as per law & without complying with other mandatory condition envisaged under the Act and without serving the mandatory notices u/s 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in framing the impugned assessment in violation of Principles of Natural Justice in as much as passing the impugned order by recording incorrect facts and findings. 4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of the Ld. AO in invoking the provisions of section 269SS of the I.T.Act, 1961 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. At the time of hearing, non-appeared on behalf of the assessee on 24.02.2026, 25.03.2026, 25.05.2026 and 25.06.2026.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee had not appeared during the assessment proceedings and had changed his version which was found to be unreliable.

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 5880/Del/2025 Karam VIR

5.

From examination of record in light of above submissions, it is crystal clear that as per information from Inspector Incharge Thana-Kotwali Mathura vide his letter dated 11.06.2020 cash of Rs. 11,45,000/- was seized from Shri Shakil Alias Vijay S/O Shri Nizamuddin, Aligarh. On being interrogated, Shri Shakil informed that amount of Rs. 11,45,000/- belonged to Shri Karamvir Bhati assessee. Despite notices, assessee failed to submit his version. So, addition of Rs. 11,45,000/- was made against the assessee. In appeal, assessee before Ld. CIT(A), assessee claimed amount of Rs. 11,45,000/- belonged to his family having earned from agriculture produced accumulated for several years. The explanations were rejected by the Ld. CIT(A). In absence of any supporting material, the grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are untenable.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 08.07.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 5880/Del/2025 Karam VIR

4.

CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →