TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 2036
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 18 March 2024, passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the assessment unit determining total income at Rs. 4,970,789 as against the returned income of Rs. 1,210,720, was dismissed. The assessee is aggrieved. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] NAFC, under Section 250 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2022-23, dated 26/02/2026, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, may be quashed. 2. The appellant denies herself liable to be assessed on a total income as determined in the impugned order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant and her husband jointly have purchased the property for a total purchase consideration of Rs. 1,95,00,000/- jointly and deducted TDS on the total consideration paid by them on the total amount of Rs. 1,95,00,000/- i.e. TDS on Rs. 1,00,00,000/- deducted by the appellant and the balance amount of Rs. 95,00,000/- TDS having been deducted by the husband of the appellant and have been duly remitted to the account of the government and consequently the addition made as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act requires to be deleted, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3.3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] and the learned assessing officer on an erroneous appreciation of facts and without considering ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... levied are not discernible and are wrong on the facts of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute or delete any or all of the grounds of appeal urged above. 7. For the above and other grounds to be urged during the course of hearing of the appeal the Appellant prays that the appeal be allowed in the interest of equity and justice. 3. The facts show that the assessee, an individual deriving salary income, filed her return declaring total income of Rs. 1,210,720. During the year, she and her spouse jointly purchased an immovable property for Rs. 195 lakh as co-owners. The assessee deducted tax at source on her share of the payment, and her spouse also deducted tax on his share. The return ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an of Rs. 1 crore and mutual fund redemption of Rs. 1,979,861 stood explained, leaving Rs. 7,520,139 as unexplained, and proposed to add 50% thereof, i.e., Rs. 3,760,069, in the hands of the assessee. 7. The assessee did not respond to this show-cause notice. The learned Assessing Officer therefore completed the assessment by order dated 28 March 2024, adding Rs. 3,760,069 to the returned income of Rs. 1,210,720 and determining the assessed income at Rs. 4,970,790. 8. Aggrieved, the assessee appealed before the learned CIT(A), who reproduced the statement of facts and the assessment order, referred in paragraph 13 to Form No. 35 and the assessee's request to file additional evidence under Rule 46A, declined to admit the same, and uphe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of Rs. 25 lakh, credited to the HDFC Bank account. These details were submitted before both the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A), and were already on record when the show-cause notice was issued. Merely because the assessee did not respond to the second show-cause notice, no addition could have been made when all relevant information was already on record. The learned CIT(A) also confirmed the addition only on the ground that the assessee had not replied to the second show-cause notice. The assessee admitted that she could not respond to that notice; however, she had already furnished the necessary details in response to the earlier notice, and they were also before the learned CIT(A). In these circumstances, the investment of Rs....