AMIT GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR

1 The very action taken u/s. 147 r/w 148 is bad in law without juri iction and being void ab-initio, the same kindly be quashed. Consequently, the impugned assessment framed u/s 143(3)/148 dated 27.12.2018 also kindly be quashed.

2 The impugned order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 dated 28.12.2007 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of juri iction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be quashed.

Rs. 10,55,00/-: The Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the Ld. AO by treating Rs 10,55,000/- as unexplained investment made in the purchase of plot. The addition so made and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts on the record and hence the same kindly be deleted in full.

Rs. 4.32,313/-: The Ld. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full.

The appellant prays your honour to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was amongst the non-filers of return u/s. 139 of the Act. It was noticed by the department that the assessee entered into the transactions of shares amounting to Rs. 26,15,511/- and also purchased a property of Rs. 10.55 Lacs alongwith a vehicle of Rs. 5,05,788/-. The assessee also received a salary of Rs. 35,490/-. In view of the above information, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued vide dated: 26.03.2018 and in response to the same the assessee filed hise-return on 26.05.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 40,310/-. The case of the assessee was assessed after making addition of Rs. 1,65,490/- under the head salary and unexplained investment of Rs. 10.55 Lacs in house property. The assessee being aggrieved with the same, preferred an appeal before the Ld. Addl./JCIT (A)- 2, Mumbai, who in turn confirmed the order of the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee being further aggrieved with the same, preferred the present appeal before us. We have gone through the order of the AO passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT (A)- 2, Mumbai and submissions of the assessee alongwith grounds of appeal taken before us.

It is observed that the AR of the assessee himself declared income of Rs. 1.3 Lacs earned from an educational institution under the head salary. The basic dispute in this matter related to the addition of Rs. 10.55 Lacs alleged as undisclosed investment by the assessee. It is observed that the assessee has submitted before the AO and the Ld. Addl./JCIT (A)- 2, Mumbai, that the assessee is an actual owner in possession of plot no. 77, Shiv Nagar-III, Ram Nagariya, Jaipur measuring 262.20 Sq. Yards since 2005, i.e. from the date of allotment. The property was firstly allotted vide possession letter dated: 19.01.2005 from nizi khatedar and received a possession letter of the same. Later on, JDA issued a Patta in his name on 3.7.2008. 4. As per the assessee, he required some money, so he put his original paper with Mr. Arvind Kumar Mittal and made a power of attorney in his name as security of his money. Although the amount borrowed by the assessee from Mr. Arvind Kumar Mittal was nowhere mentioned in the submissions of the assessee as well as power of attorney signed in favour of Mr. Arvind Kumar Mittal. As per the assessee Mr. Arvind Kumar Mittal had wrong intentions and made fake sales agreement in one month back date and fraudulently created fake documents with an intention to swipe the plot. After that Mr. Arvind Kumar

Now in the light of above narrated facts, it is observed that the assessee has failed to:

In the given situation and facts, as narrated above in para 5 (supra), the assessee has failed to establish his version of incidents claimed to have taken place, and can’t be relied upon. In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed and orders of the authorities below are confirmed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The Order is pronounced in the open court on the 28th day of July2025. (NARINDER KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur, िदनांक/Dated: 28/07/2025