DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, RAJPUR ROAD, DEHRADUN vs. SANDEEP SANGHAL, KANWLI ROAD, DEHRADUN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition, agreeing that the seized document was a 'dumb document' without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal noted that no inquiry was made from the seller, and the seller's affidavit confirmed the consideration as per registered sale deeds, which was also reaffirmed by the DVO's valuation.
What were the facts?
During a search operation, a document was found indicating an alleged cash payment of INR 1,89,10,000 for a property purchased by the assessee and his wife. The Assessing Officer added 50% of this amount (INR 94,55,000) as undisclosed income under Section 69B. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, finding the document to be unauthenticated and uncorroborated.
What were the issues?
The key legal issue was whether an unauthenticated and uncorroborated seized document, without specific details, could be the sole basis for making an addition for undisclosed investment under Section 69B of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 69B,Section 115BBE,Section 132,Section 132(4A),Section 143(2),Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 292C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2020-21] PAN-AUEPS1161Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.Nos.1 & 3/DDN/2026 [In ITA No. 277/DDN/2025] [Assessment Year : 2020-21] PAN-AUEPS1161Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2020-21] Village-Biasnehri, Haripur, Dehradun Kalsi Gate, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand-248001 PAN-BNIPS9413F APPELLANT RESPONDENT
ITA Nos. 277 & 278/DDN/2025 & C.O.Nos.1 to 3/DDN/2026
C.O.No.2/DDN/2026 [In ITA No. 278/DDN/2025] [Assessment Year : 2020-21] Village-Biasnehri, Haripur, Central Circle, Kalsi Gate, Dehradun, Dehradun Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand PAN-BNIPS9413F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT DR Assessee by Shri Harshit Gupta, CA & Shri Zaki Mansoori, CA Date of Hearing 12.03.2026
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 69B
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S Rajguru Foods, BijapurITA 77/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Alka Ajit Shah, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer Ward 20(1)(1), MumbaiITA 1915/MUM/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Rama Krishna Jewellers Private Limited…ITA 1289/DEL/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
- Front Line Guards Private Limited, Navi… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward 14(1)(1)…ITA 7909/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Haripa Industries, Kolkata vs ITO, Central Circle 4(1), KolkataITA 2283/KOL/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-2020
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jharkhand Contractors Association Thro Its President- Pramod Kumar vs. Bharat Coking Coal LTD. Thro Its Chairman Cum Managing DirectorJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Isc Processors Private Limited vs. Superintendent,Range-Iv, Burrabazar Div, CGST And Cx, Kolkata (N) Commissionerate And AnrCalcutta · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Raashi Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026