SHANTI KUMARI SHARMA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(3), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4892/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 October 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial 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 lower authorities erred in law and facts by not accepting the cash withdrawals of Rs. 8 lacs as explained. The Tribunal ordered to delete the impugned addition.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC. The lower authorities treated the assessee's investment of Rs. 7,52,060/- in an immovable property as unexplained.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash withdrawals of Rs. 8 lacs were sufficiently explained as sale consideration for an immovable property, and if the addition made by the lower authorities was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘SMC’ BENCH, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 24/09/2025Pronounced: 13/10/2025

(A.Y 2012-13) Shanti Kumari Sharma Vs. ITO C/o CA Vaibhav Goel Ward-2 (2) (3) 75, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad 1st Floor, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh PAN NO. ALFPK1339Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Vaibhav Goel, CA Revenue by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 13/10/2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA , JM:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1078607047(1) dated 17.07.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It transpires during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities have treated the assessee’s investment made of Rs.7,52,060/- in purchase of immovable property in question, as unexplained u/s.69A of the Act, in assessment order dated 30.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

2 4892/Del/2025 Shanti Kumari

4.

A perusal of the case file reveals with the able assistance coming from both the parties that assessee in fact had sold an immovable property / flat on 13.04.2011 /deposited the corresponding sale consideration in her bank account maintained with M/s. ICICI Bank followed by withdrawal Rs. 4 lacs each (twice) on 19.04.2011 which is subject matter of addition of Rs.752060/-, made by both the lower authorities. That being the case this tribunal hereby holds both the learned lower authorities erred in law and on facts in not accepting the above cash withdrawals of Rs.8 lacs as explained, to delete the impugned addition amounting to Rs.752060/- in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13/10/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →