AMIT KUMAR RAI,RAMNAGAR, WEST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BETTIAH, BIHAR

ITA 223/PAT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 October 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Amit Kumar Rai, filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 147 based on information that the assessee purchased immovable property and made a cash payment of Rs. 5 lakh, with Rs. 35 lakh paid by Chandra Mohan Ojha on his behalf. The assessee filed a return declaring the same income but provided no satisfactory explanation for the cash payment or the payment made by Chandra Mohan Ojha. Consequently, the AO added Rs. 5 lakh under Section 69A, Rs. 35 lakh as deemed gift, and disallowed a deduction of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 80C for lack of evidence. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed these additions.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided some information regarding the source of investments to the AO but failed to submit supporting documents. It was also observed that the AO did not conduct any inquiry or verification on the submissions made by the assessee. Furthermore, the Ld. CIT(A) had directed the AO to verify the year of execution of the sale deed. Considering these facts, the Tribunal deemed it fit to set aside the impugned assessment and directed the AO to frame the assessment de novo after conducting necessary inquiry and verification. The assessee was directed to produce supporting documents and comply with the AO's notices. The issue of whether the additions and disallowance were justified was not decided on merits, but the case was remanded for fresh assessment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is justified? 2. Whether the addition of Rs. 35,00,000/- as deemed gift under Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is justified? 3. Whether the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 1,50,000/- under Section 80C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for want of evidence is justified? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions but also directed the AO to conduct verification. The assessee requested an opportunity to submit all supporting evidence before the AO and sought the setting aside of the entire assessment for de novo consideration. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. DR did not raise serious objections.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69A,Section 56(2)(x),Section 80C,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: PATNA

Before: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Gopalan Gurusamy

Per Gopalan Gurusamy, AM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Act dated 01.01.2026 for the AY 2020-21, vide Appeal No. NFAC/2019- 20/10445966. 2 Assessment Years: 2020-21 Amit Kumar Rai

2.

The brief facts on record are that the assessee, an individual has filed his return of income for AY 2020-21, declaring a total income of Rs.3,36,240/-. Based on credible information that the assessee has purchased immovable property along with Rubi Rai and C

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 →