Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, represented by his wife, had not filed a return of income. Proceedings were initiated under Section 148A based on high-value transactions. The assessment led to additions under Section 69 for unexplained investment in property and disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A.
Held
The Tribunal held that the payments for the property purchase were made through account payee cheques from an SBI OD loan account, which was substantiated by bank statements and the sale deed. The disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A was also directed to be allowed, subject to prescribed ceilings.
Key Issues
Whether the addition for unexplained investment in property is sustainable when payments are evidenced by cheques from a loan account? Whether the disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A is justified?
Sections Cited
250, 148A, 144, 147, 69, VI-A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay condoned.
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short), for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
“1. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in not considering the submissions and evidences filed by appellant, and in confirming the addition of Rs. 8,92,500/- made towards unexplained payment for purchase of property u/s 69 of the Act.
Bharatkumar Vithaldas Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 2– 2. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in confirming the disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs.1,65,000/- made under Chapter VI-A of the Act.”
In the present case, the original assessee, being a salaried bank employee since deceased, now represented by his wife as legal heir, had not filed a return of income for the relevant assessment year. Based on high-value transactions flagged under the Non-Filer Monitoring System (NMS), including purchase of immovable property, credit card payments, and salary disbursements, proceedings were initiated under section 148A of the Act. Subsequently, the assessment was completed under section 144 r.w.s. 147, determining total income of Rs. 22,15,203/- and making additions under section 69 of the Act. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition of Rs. 8,92,500/- towards unexplained investment in property and further disallowed the claim of Rs. 1,65,000/- made under Chapter VI-A.
During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the assessee submitted evidence in the form of bank statements showing that the sum of Rs. 8,92,500/- was paid by account payee cheques drawn from a SBI OD Personal Loan Staff account. These documents were also filed during appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). The payment details are corroborated by the sale deed and the property purchase schedule.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In respect of the addition of Rs. 8,92,500/-, we find that the payments of Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 3,92,500/- were made through account payee cheques from the assessee’s SBI OD loan account, and the bank statement placed on record substantiates the same. The payments match with the schedule in the registered sale deed. We are, therefore, satisfied that the source of funds is satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, the addition made under section 69 of the Act is directed to be deleted.
Bharatkumar Vithaldas Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 3– 6. With regard to the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 1,65,000/- under Chapter VI-A, since the amount has been paid towards the tuition fee of the children, the same is to be allowed subjected to the ceiling prescribed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 26.11.2025.