SUCHA SINGH,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURUKSHETRA, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR,JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.1166/CHANDI/2024 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Sucha Singh ITO Ward – 1 House No. 129, Village - Thesil Bora Kurukshetra बनाम/ Vs. Post Office, Jandola, Pehowa Kurukshetra Haryana – 136128 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BMIPS-6483-C (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. B.M. Momga (Advocate) a/w Sh. Rohit Kaura (Advocate) – Ld. ARs ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 04-05-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 11-05-2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 14-10-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 22-03-2022. In the assessment order, Ld. AO

made addition of cash deposit for Rs.199.25 Lacs on best judgment basis since the assessee remained non-compliant. 2. During first appeal, the assessee claimed that it entered into an agreement on 10-09-2013 for selling part of his agricultural land and received advance of Rs.1 Crores during FY 2013-14 and the balance Rs.379.25 Lacs was received at the time of registration of sale deed on 29-04-2014. It was also stated that the sale deed was registered at collector’s rate for Rs.187.80 Lacs. The said deposits were claimed to be deposited out of sale proceeds. The assessee furnished additional evidences to establish that the land was an agricultural land. The same were subjected to remand proceedings. Considering the remand report, Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the additional evidences. However, findings were rendered on merits also. It was observed that the agreement was an unregistered agreement which had no relevance in the eyes of law. There was no mention of this agreement in the sale deed. Moreover, the sale consideration was Rs.187.80 Lacs and not Rs.479.25 Lacs as stated by the assessee. Therefore, the cognizance of the agreement could not be taken. Further, total credit in the bank account (from 10- 09-2013 to 29-04-2014) was Rs.316.50 Lacs which did not match with the stated sale consideration of Rs.479.25 Lacs. The assessee could not prove that the sale consideration was received in cash. The assessee failed to establish that the land was an agricultural land since the population of Pehowa Municipal Corporation was more than 10000 and therefore, the said land do not qualify for agricultural land. Finally,

the action of Ld. AO was endorsed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR drew attention to copy of Tehsildar Certificate showing distance of land and also referred to agreement to sell and sale deed to contend that the deposits were sourced out of sale consideration of agricultural land which was exempt. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee was owner of agricultural land measuring 164 Kanal and 04 Marlas at Village Themalbora and derived agricultural income from it. A part of the said land was sold and the sale proceeds were deposited in bank account at different intervals and it was the sole source of money as deposited in the bank account of the assessee. Further, the Tehsildar certificate would show that the said land was located at a distance of more than 12 KM from nearest Municipal Committee and therefore, the income derived by the assessee was exempt. In the said background, Ld. AR sought another opportunity of bearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 4. We find that the assessee, on the given facts and documentary evidences, could be in a position to substantiate the source of cash deposit. Therefore, accepting the prayer of Ld. AR, we set aside the impugned order and considering the fact that the order of Ld. AO is an ex-parte order, restore the assessment back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. For this, the assessee is directed to plant 50 trees of minimum 4 feet height at nearby vicinity within 60 days from the date of

receipt of this order. The proof of the same including photographs and relevant bills / vouchers would be submitted to Ld. AO who would thereafter proceed for de novo assessment. No other ground has been urged in the appeal. 5. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 11th May, 2026.

-Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 11-05-2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH