PRAKASH CHANDRA DOSI,NEEMUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEEMUCH

ITA 658/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 October 2026AY 2011-1213 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the agreement to sell, purportedly dated 10.01.2010, stated a total sale consideration of Rs. 40,00,000/- with payments of Rs. 24,00,000/- and Rs. 10,00,000/- in cash by the assessee to Shri Dannalal Patel, and a balance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. However, the agreement did not bear the assessee's signature. The balance amount was paid by Smt. Kesar Bai via cheque, and the sale deed dated 19.10.2010 was executed in favour of Smt. Kesar Bai for Rs. 6,00,000/-. Shri Dannalal Patel's affidavit stated receipt of Rs. 24,00,000/- and Rs. 10,00,000/- in cash from the assessee. The AO issued a letter under Section 133(6) to the District Registrar. The Tribunal found that the AO had initiated proceedings based on an agreement not signed by the assessee and where the stamp was issued after the agreement date. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition for non-explanation of the source of investment and validity of reopening. The Tribunal did not provide a final decision on the issues in the provided excerpt, but the discussion indicates a focus on the authenticity of the agreement and the source of funds.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Prakash Chandra Dosi, an individual earning agricultural income, is in appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on an agreement to sell agricultural land dated 10.01.2010 and an affidavit from Shri Dannalal Patel. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- as unexplained investment, assessing the total income at Rs. 10,00,000/-. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, holding that the assessee failed to explain the source of the Rs. 10,00,000/- payment made on 14.06.2010 for property purchase and the reopening of assessment. The assessee had not filed a return under Section 139(1) for AY 2011-12 and filed a return declaring NIL income in response to the Section 148 notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment is correct and sustainable in law, considering the facts and circumstances of the case? - Assessee's contention: The addition is wrong and contrary to facts. The agreement to sell is not signed by the assessee, is not authentic, and the stamp was issued after the agreement date, making it a 'dumb document'. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act are valid and sustainable in law? - Assessee's contention: Reassessment proceedings were initiated without any evidence against the assessee and mechanically, without appreciating that the alleged agreement is not signed by the assessee. The proceedings are wrong and contrary to Sections 147, 148, and 151 of the Act. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 151,Section 139(1),Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI & SHRI ARVIND SONI

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Binay Kumar Rai, Sr, DR
Hearing: 02.09.2026Pronounced: 12.10.2026

PER ARVIND SONI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.05.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal Addl/JCIT (A)-1 Visakhapatnam,

[hereinafter referred to as "the ld. CIT(A)"] for Assessment Year 2011-12 arising out of assessment order framed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,

1961 ("the Act").

Prakash Chandra Dosi

2.

The assessee is an individual earning income from agriculture. The case was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 28.02.2018. In response the assessee

filed return of income on 27.03.2018 declaring total income

of Rs. NIL but the assessee had not filed the re

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →