AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM:
This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [ld. CIT(A)] dated 10.10.2025 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” in short) arising out of the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 29.03.2025 for Assessment Year 2017-18.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 28.03.2018 declaring total income at Rs.17,92,940/-. Based on the information received from the Investigation Wing, Chandigarh that the assessee has entered into cash transactions of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- with Omaxe Group towards the purchase of property at “The Forest Spa” project of Omaxe Group in Faridabad, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 on 13.03.2024. Thereafter, the reassessment order was passed dated 29.03.2025 after making addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- u/s 69 r.w.s 115BBE by holding that assessee has made unexplained investment in cash of the said sum towards acquisition of property.
Against the said order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee wherein the Ld. CIT(A) quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 148 of the Act and further deleted the additions made on merits also.
Aggrieved by said order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking various grounds of appeal.
“1.On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CITIA) has erred in law by deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-made by AO on account of unexplained investment us 69 r.w.s 115BBE of the 1.T., Act, 1961.
2.The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the request of AO to allow some more time to submit the Remand Report.
3.The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing proper opportunity to the AO and hence the order is passed without following the principles of natural justice.
4.The Ld. CIT(A) has ignored the material and evidences found during the course of Search & Seizure in the Omaxe Group clearly showing the cash transaction entered by the assessee.
5.The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the letter/documents submitted by the Omaxe Group which is merely a self serving document.
6.The appellant reserves rights to add, amend OR alter the grounds of appeal on OR, before the date of the disposal of appeal.”
Heard the parties at length and perused the materials available on record. From the perusal of the grounds taken by the Revenue, it is observed that all the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are with respect to the deletion of addition made u/s 69 of the Act of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- towards unexplained investment in the acquisition of the property r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act based on the material evidence found during the course of Omaxe Group. It is further observed that the Revenue has not challenged the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in quashing the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 of the Act and, therefore, this issue attained finality. This being so, we find no reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) there the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 of the Act were quashed. This view is fully supported by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi in the case of ACIT vs. Green Gem Estates Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1732/Del/2016 wherein vide order dated 01.02.2024, the Co-ordinate Bench has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue challenging the additions made on merits and no ground was taken for challenging the action of Ld. CIT(A) in quashing the reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal of Revenue are dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.