MOHAMMAD HUSAIN,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, MUZAFFARNAGAR

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-7, Mumbai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072735985(1) dated 03.01.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities have rightly assessed an amount of Rs.7,82,000/- as an unexplained investment in his hands, in assessment order Mohammad Husain dated 19.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. He further takes us to para 4 page 5 onwards in the impugned lower appellate order thereby rejecting the assessee’s voluminous submissions attributing source of the impugned investments to his brother’s income by way of an affidavit dated 08.09.2022 as well.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings all along and the Revenue’s vehement submissions reiterating their respective stands. We find no reason to sustain the impugned addition in entirety. This is for the precise reason that both the learned lower authorities have not considered the assessee’s socio economic status as well as his family’s past savings which could be deemed to have been invested in acquisition of the asset in question. The fact further remains that it was the assessee’s onus only to plead and prove all the relevant facts for the purpose of verification thereof before the learned lower authorities. Be that as it may, we deemed it appropriate in these peculiar facts that a lump sum addition of Rs.1,32,000/- only would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs.6,50,000/- in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.