NISHA THAKUR,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 424/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 April 2026AY 2016-177 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the assessee's appeals. The assessee failed to establish the source of investments with cogent documentary evidence, making the deposits in the bank account and the share purchases unexplained.

What were the facts?

The assessee invested in shares of M/s Shashwat Raj Agro Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2016-17 (Rs. 9,50,000) and AY 2017-18 (Rs. 6,00,000). The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these investments as unexplained income under Section 69A as the assessee failed to substantiate the source of funds.

What were the issues?

Whether the investments made in shares are unexplained income under Section 69A due to the failure to substantiate the source of funds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PATNA

Hearing: 22.04.2026Pronounced: 28.04.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 424 /PAT/2025
ITA No. 425 /PAT/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PATNA (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 424 /PAT/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 ITA No. 425 /PAT/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

Nisha Mathur, Vs. ITO, Ward 3(3), Bhakharya, Anumahadar, Nagmatia Colony, Civil Daudnagar, Aurangabad - Lines, Gaya - 823001 824113 [PAN: CNHPM7405F] APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Assessee by : Sh. Shubham Khandelia, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT

Date of hearing : 22.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2026

O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

These two appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.

2 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur CIT(A)] dated 21.07.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1078703030(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078703314(1) respectively.

2.

Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 424/Pat/2025:

“1. For that, the order of assessment passed by the Ld AO is against the weight of facts, evidences on record & contrary to the law & circumstances of the case. 2. For that, the order has been passed in hurry without taking account the relevant evidences and facts submitted by me. 3. That the substantive addition was made in the hands of M/s Shree Shashwatraj Agro Pvt Ltd in AY 2016-17 for Rs.950000/- but the same was deleted in the appeal proceedings and there since the substantive addition is already deleted, therefore the protective addition in the hands of the appellant shall also be deleted. 4. That since the income during the year and previous years has been accepted as it is, therefore the legal utilization of the same shall not be grounds to justify the addition made by the AO. 5. For that, the whole order is void in fact and law of the case and is fit to be annulled. 6. For that, the appellant craves leave to add, alter, rectify, revise, amend and modify or withdraw all or any of the aforesaid ground of appeal and file additional grounds ground at the time of filing appeal or in course of appeal proceedings.” 2.1 Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 425/Pat/2025:

“The assesseee is in the status of Individual & derives Income from Business or Profession & Other sources. The assessee had filed its Return of Income for A.Y.2017-18 showing a total income Rs.2,98,510/- on 21/03/2018. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued on 26/07/2021 and the income tax return against the notice was filed on 25/11/2022 against acknowledgement number 820049760251122. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 18/11/2022 and 17/02/2023 against which the reply was submitted on 26/11/2022 and 02/03/2023 respectively. Further notice u/s 143(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961

3 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur was issued on 29/11/2022 against which the reply was submitted on 02/03/2023. Further order u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 was passed on 01.03.2023 making an addition of Rs.6,00,000/-. Further, an appeal was filed on 28.03.2023 to The Ld CIT(A) against the assessment order passed and after due hearing, the final appeal order was passed on 21.07.2025 confirming an addition of Rs.600000/-. In the above said matter, as per department findings an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- stated as purchase of shares of M/s Shri Shashwatraj Agro Pvt Ltd by assessee is considered as unexplained income u/s 69A. As per the Ld. AO, the source of income for purchase of such shares are not justified by the assesee and details of each entry in bank statement is not provided by assesee. Therefore the stated amount shall be added back to the total income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act 1961, and penalty proceeding u/s 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should be initiated for underreporting of the income inconsequence of misreporting thereof.” 3. From the above grounds of appeal, it is clear that the issues involved are identical for both the years except the figures shown in the grounds of appeal. We gone through the assessment order the facts are also similar, therefore, we are passing a common order for ITA No. 424 & 425/Pat/2025.

4.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information received that the assessee has purchased shares of M/s Shashwat Raj Agro Pvt. Ltd. of Rs. 9,50,000/- in AY 2016-17 and Rs. 6,00,000/- for AY 2017-18. As per the information received the case was reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act after following the due procedure for reopening the case. During the course of assessment proceeding, the assessee was asked to explain the source of investments in shares of M/s Shashwat Raj Agro Pvt. Ltd. In response to this, the assessee filed date of investment in shares and quantum of shares and stated that the investments were made through banking channels out of the capital

4 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur accumulated by the assessee from his income earned by her during captioned assessment year assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading of grains and other related items and sometime due to the poor harvest and other uncontrollable factors margin of the assessee of shoots up. The assessee has furnished “further as you for mentioned that all the credit amount has not added as turnover of the firm and it is show because some of the credit entries are advance amount received which is adjusted as turnover in the subsequent assessment year”. On going through the submission of the assessee the AO was not convinced and he noted that the source of investment was not explained. Accordingly, he added the entire income u/s 69A of the Act for both the years.

5.

Aggrieved from the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

6.

Aggrieved from the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT.

7.

The Ld. Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of grains and other related items. He further submitted that the assessee is filing return of income u/s 44AD of the Act. From the assessment year 2014-15 which is clear from the order of Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has

5 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur deposited her accumulated/ accrued funds in the bank account as provided for the years. Therefore, the investment made through banking channel is explained.

8.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the order of lower authorities and submitted that the assessee failed to substantiate the business carried out by her. There is no any documentary evidence to produce the source of deposit in the bank account which is clear from the order of both the authorities below.

9.

Considering the rival submissions and perusing the entire materials available on record and the orders of authorities below. We noted that the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act as per the information received that the assessee has made investments in share application money of M/s Shashwat Raj Agro Pvt. Ltd. in both the years of Rs. 9,50,000/- and Rs. 6,00,000/- respectively but during the course of assessment proceedings as well as first appellate proceedings the assessee could not establish the source of investments made. From the submissions of the assessee the accumulation/savings were deposited in the bank account of the assessee but real source of income could not be established by the assessee that the assessee was carrying any business activity without cogent documents like certificate issued for carrying business activity under the shop establishment Act. or any electricity bill (Commercial connection) paid or any purchase

6 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur invoices for the trading of goods or GST Registration if applicable. Merely filing of the income tax return without complete financial statements/ state of affairs which was processed u/s 143(i)(a) of the Act is not sufficient to prove the creditability. On going through the income declared by the assessee for the last three years which is also very low and whether the assessee had paid any tax on such income declared or not is also not clear and the entire income earned during the year cannot be part of the savings and cannot be accumulated since the house hold expenditures are required to be considered, there is no any detail furnished by the assessee for savings out of the income declared in the ITR. Therefore, source of deposit in bank account and investment made for purchase of shares of M/s Shashwat Raj Agro Pvt. Ltd. is remained unexplained. Accordingly, we upheld the order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

10.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced on 28.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 28.04.2026 AK, Sr. P.S.

7 ITA Nos. 424 & 425/PAT/2025 Nisha Mathur Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order

Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →