Ashok Singh Yadav Vs. ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 2020-21, declaring a total income of Rs. 6,28,870/-. There was information that the assessee had purchased an immovable property from Omaxe Group and paid Rs. 30,00,000/- in cash during the year under consideration. A search operation was carried out at various offices and residential premises of Omaxe Group, leading to the seizure of various evidences, including an excel file. The statements of the President of Omaxe Group and various employees were recorded. The correlation of seized evidence depicted that the data was related to unaccounted cash transactions pertaining to the Omaxe Group. The data from the excel sheet disclosed that the assessee had made an investment in the property of Omaxe Group. The assessee's case was reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee, seeking details and explanations with respect to the immovable property purchased during the year under consideration and the amount paid in cash to the Omaxe Group. The assessing officer was not satisfied and treated the amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- as unexplained investment and added it in the total income of the assessee under section 69 of the Act. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax/ NFAC(Delhi), who dismissed the assessee's appeal. The assessee has preferred this second appeal on the grounds th…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- as unexplained investment, made by the assessee in the immovable property, under section 69 of the Act?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Divya Panwar vs DCIT

  Delhi "B" Bench: New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed

• Kusum Lata vs. Income Tax Officer

  Chandigarh bench

• ITA No.1828/JPR/2025 Ankit Kumar Vs. ITO

  Jaipur bench

• Ganpat Harishchandra Purohit Vs. DCIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai-400051

• Reba Roy vs. AO, Ward-2(1), Coochbehar

  Kolkata bench

• Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), Nagpur v/s Shri Waman Mahadeorao Sarode

  Nagpur bench