Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's case was reopened for AY 2020-21 after information indicated the purchase of a property for Rs. 32 lakhs, with a market value of Rs. 46.89 lakhs and stamp duty of Rs. 3,60,307/-. The Assessing Officer made additions under Sections 69 and 69C for unexplained investment and expenditure, which were confirmed by the CIT(A), as the assessee initially failed to explain the source of funds. The assessee contended that the funds were from her 83-year-old father's accumulated salary and pension savings, which were non-taxable and supported by cheque payment details over several years.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the property was booked in 2016 and registered in 2019. Considering the father's advanced age, his retirement history, and the fact that his accumulated salary and pension income was not taxable, the Tribunal accepted the explanation provided by the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the funds for the property purchase and stamp duty were from the father's personal savings.
Key Issues
Whether the additions made under Sections 69 and 69C for unexplained investment and expenditure related to a property purchase were justifiable when the assessee explained the source of funds as accumulated non-taxable savings of her aged father.
Sections Cited
69, 69C, 147, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY
(निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2020-2021) Padmakshi Chakraborty, Vs ITO Ward-25(1), Kolkata P207, Parnasree Pally, Behela, Parnasree, Kolkata-700060 PAN No. :AEMPC 5269 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररतीकीओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Satender Gupta, FCA रधजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue by : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 13.09.2025for the assessment year 2020-2021.
The only issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.32 lakhs and Rs.3,60,307/- made u/s.69 & 69C of the Act, respectively in respect of purchase of a property by the assessee.
Facts in brief are that the case of the assessee was reopened u/s.147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act on 23.03.2024. The case of the assessee was reopened after the Assessing Officer received information that the assessee purchased a property during the financial year 2019-2020 for a purchase consideration of Rs.32 lakhs. The market value as per registration was Rs.46,89,600/-. Stamp Duty paid Rs.3,60,307/-. The assessee has also received interest income of Rs.32,908/- from Indian Overseas bank and Rs.25,990/- from Bank of Baroda. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee has not furnished any evidence for the source of funds amounting to Rs.32 lakhs for the purchase of property and Rs.3,60,307/- for payment of stamp duty/registration charges. The Assessing Officer in absence of any reply from the assessee treated the same amount as unexplained investment and the stamp duty was treated as unexplained expenditure and added the same to the total income of the assessee.
In the appellate proceedings, the assessee furnished evidences before the ld. CIT(A), however, the appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) holding that the assessee could not explain source of funds invested for purchase of property at Rs.32,00,000/- and stamp duty/registration charges of Rs.3,60,307/-.
Now, the assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal.
After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that the assessee has booked the property in 2016 and registered in 2019. The source of fund amounting to Rs.32,00,000/- utilized for purchase of property and expenditure towards the stamp duty/registration charges amount of Rs.3,60,307/- were made out of the cheques issued from UBI, Kasba Branch, SBI Kolkata Branch, SBI Parnashree Pally, Kolkata and cash on 20.07.2016 Rs.2,00,000/-. The details of which are as under :- Sl.No. Detail of Cheque with date Amount in Rs. 1 Cheque No. 985253 dated 8.4.2016 drawn 500000 on UBI Kasba Branch 2 Cheque No. 985256 dated 18.5.2016 drawn 500000 on UBI Kasba Branch 3 Cash 2,00,000 4 Cheque No. 985257 dated 19.8.2016 drawn 5,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 5 Cheque No. 428124 dated 25.3.2017 drawn 3,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 6 Cheque No. 982262 dated 25.2.2017 drawn 2,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 7 Cheque No. 738841 dated 9.1.2018 drawn 1,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 8 Cheque No. 738843 dated 28.5.2018 drawn 2,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 9 Cheque No. 738848 dated 20.1.2019 drawn 2,00,000 on UBI Kasba Branch 10 Cheque No. 428138 dated 12.2.2019 drawn 2,50,000 on Parnashree Pally, Kolkata 11 Cheque No. 428138 dated 12.2.2019 drawn 2,50,000 on Parnashree Pally, Kolkata Total 32,00,000 7. It was submitted by the ld. AR before us that the property was purchased in joint ownership with mother of the assessee. It was also submitted that the money was received from father, who is aged 83 years and retired from Hindustan Cables ltd. on 31.10.1996 after 34 years of services and it was the only salary income which was accumulated over the years. The father of the assessee has not filed any return of income because the income is not taxable. It was submitted before us that since around 29 years are passed from his date of retirement, it was not possible to retain all the retirement papers and receipts thereon. The ld.AR further submitted that the details of funds utilized for purchase of the said property was available, aggregating to Rs.32,00,000/- and also for meeting the other incidental expenses connected therewith. Considering these facts and circumstances, we are inclined to hold that the property purchased by the assessee is from the personal savings of her father from salary and pension etc. Accordingly, we are inclined to set