GEETA SHARMA (INDL),MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(2), MEERUT

O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: The appeal in for AY 2012-13, arises out 1. of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’ in short] in Appeal No. DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1046145100(1) dated 30.09.2022 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 19.09.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(2), Meerut (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, the 2. only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld NFAC was justified in confirming the addition made on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act towards purchase of Page | 1 immovable property in the sum of Rs. 21,90,100/- in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material 3. available on record. The assessee is an agriculturist and not assessed to income tax. Based on the Non PAN AIR information received by the ld AO stating that the assessee had purchased an immovable property for Rs. 1,02,43,000/- during the year under consideration and also had paid stamp duty of Rs. 7,07,500/- and the ld AO based on the copy of purchase deed received from Deputy Registrar confirming the aforesaid facts, proceeded to add 1/5th value of the property, being the assessee’s share thereon, as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act in the sum of Rs. 21,90,100/-. No explanation was offered by the assessee before the ld AO as it was submitted that no notice was served on the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld NFAC. Before the ld NFAC, it was submitted that the assessee, being an agriculturist, had never filed any income tax return and had not received any notice from the Income Tax Department at all. The only source of income is income from agricultural lands owned by the family. It was submitted that during the year, the assessee’s husband Mr. Surender Pal Sharma sold some agriculture land which was in the joint name with his other brothers. The sale proceeds received thereon was reinvested by Mr. Surender Pal Sharma in the joint name of his wife by purchasing another agricultural land. This could not be properly explained before the ld AO as no notice was served on her. The ld NFAC however did not agree to the contentions of the assessee and proceeded to confirm the addition made by the ld AO.