Addition unsustainable where housing loan and spouse’s bank trail accepted in parallel assessment
Meetu Kumari | Feb 23, 2026 |
ITAT Deletes Rs. 14.74 Lakh Section 69 Addition and Alleged On-Money in Flat Purchase Case
Smt. Mithlesh Amarnath Maurya did not file her return for A.Y. 2013-14. Reassessment under section 147 was initiated based on search-related information in the case of M/s Bhagwati Developers group alleging on-money in property transactions. The Assessing Officer alleged that the assessee purchased a flat for Rs. 53,87,000 with on-money of Rs. 3,37,000 and, due to non-compliance, completed assessment, making addition of Rs. 57,24,000 as unexplained investment.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee explained that the flat was jointly purchased with her husband for Rs. 53,32,000, funded partly by a housing loan of Rs. 42,50,000 from HDFC Ltd. and the balance from her husband’s savings through banking channels. The CIT(A) accepted the loan but sustained Rs. 14,74,000 for want of supporting evidence and did not delete the alleged on-money addition.
Issue Before ITAT: Whether addition of Rs. 14,74,000 under section 69 and Rs. 3,37,000 towards alleged on-money could be sustained when the housing loan was accepted, payments were claimed through banking channels, and the same transaction stood accepted in the spouse’s assessment.
Tribunal’s Decision: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confined itself to the merits of the additions. It noted that the housing loan of Rs. 42,50,000 was accepted and that the balance Rs. 14,74,000 was consistently explained as paid through banking channels from the spouse’s accumulated savings. The Tribunal held that sustaining addition in the assessee’s hands while accepting the same source in the spouse’s case led to inconsistency. Thus, the addition of Rs. 14,74,000 was deleted.
The Tribunal found no seized material or specific evidence linking the assessee to any cash payment. The addition was based only on general information relating to the builder group and was not even sustained in the spouse’s case. Due to the absence of corroborative evidence, the addition was held unsustainable. Both additions were deleted and the appeal was allowed.
To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below
In case of any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]
Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"
