MAUHAR SINGH,AGRA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 151/AGR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 February 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition was based on mere inference, as the seized documents did not provide any instance of actual payment. Therefore, the addition was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 8,13,800/- to the assessee's income, alleging an on-money payment in the acquisition of an asset. This addition was based on the inference of cash payment in the acquisition of an asset sold by a searched party.

What were the issues?

Whether an addition can be sustained based on mere inference of on-money payment without concrete evidence of actual payment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 17.02.2025Pronounced: 17.02.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4 [in short the “CIT(A)”], Kanpur’s order in Appeal No. CIT-(A)-IV/KNP/10403/2014-15 dated 28.07.2023, involving proceedings under section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have made on-money payment addition of Rs.8,13,800/- alleging the assessee to have paid cash in acquisition of the corresponding asset sold by the searched party/builder M/s Sushil Chauhan group. We make it clear that even the Assessing Officer is fair enough while reproducing the corresponding seized documents wherein there is no instance of any actual payment emanating there/and therefore, we conclude that the impugned addition based on mere inference does not deserve to be sustained. Same stands deleted in very terms therefore.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2025.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →