##PAGE1##

$~29

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CS(OS) 1006/2024&I.A. 49914/2024

SHRI OMVIR GUPTA .....Plaintiff

Through: None

versus

SMT. ANITA KAUSHIK & ORS. .....Defendants

Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with

Mr.Sanjeev Menonand Mr. Gaurav

Kumar, Adv. forIncome Tax

Department

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

1. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Income Tax

Department states that the final enquiry report dated 18.11.2025 has been

duly served on the plaintiff and the proof of service is placed on record.

1.1 He states that the Assessing Officer [‘AO’]has conducted an enquiry

and, pursuant thereto, has concluded that AO is not satisfied that the plaintiff

had sufficiency of the source of funds so as to enable the plaintiff to make a

cash payment of ₹ 1,01,00,000/- to the defendant on the dates mentioned in

the plaint.

1.2 He further states that the AO shall initiate appropriate proceedings, in

accordance with law, against the plaintiff and the alleged lenders from

whom the said cash fundsare alleged to have been collected for non-

compliance of notices issued by department under section 133(6) of the IT

Act.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:28:14

1.3 He states that the said report may be accepted by thisCourt.

2. This Court has perused the report and finds that the AO has concluded

as under:-

“7. Conclusion of the Inquiry

On the basis of:

- Consistently low/insignificant cash-in-hand declared in all ITRs

- Absence of any documentary evidence of loans or source of Rs.

1,01,00,000/- cash

- Non-compliance by the plaintiff and alleged lenders with notices u/s

133(6)

- No evidence of sale of assets, redemption of investments or any

other credible source

It is respectfully submitted that Shri Omvir Gupta did not possess

the financial capacity nor has been able to demonstrate any credible

source for payment of ₹ 1,01,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore One Lakh

only) in cash to late Smt. Pushplata Gautam on 15.11.2023 or over

any period as alleged

8.The plaintiff has also admitted (as recorded in order dated 17.12.2024)

that no TDS was deducted/deposited u/s 194-IA of the Income-tax Act,

1961 on the alleged transaction exceeding ₹50 lakhs.

9. No further information or evidence has been received till the date of

this report.

……….

10. In respect of persistent and deliberate non-compliance with notices

issued u/s 133(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Department is

empowered to initiate the proceedings independently under following

provisions (However, notwithstanding this office’s independent authority

to take action, it is duty bound to act against the assessee as and when

directed by the Hon’ble Court)

1) Section 148/148A (Re-opening of assessments (plaintiff &

Lenders) for relevant AYs) under current provisions of Income Tax

Act, [ Time limits for re-opening u/s 149(1)(b) (5 years where

escaped income > Rs.50 Lakh involving cash/asset)]

2) Section 271D/271DA (Violation of 269SS & 269ST (cash

loans/receipts >Rs.20,000 / Rs.2 lakh) -plaintiff liable.

3) Section 272A(1)(c)/(d) [Non-compliance with 133(6) notices.]

The undersigned has already initiated necessary steps for levy of

penalty u/s 272A(1)(c)/(d) in respect of all the four persons

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:28:14

11. The department shall initiate a proper Assessment or Penalty

Proceedings with in the applicable time limits against all the parties as

and when found to be in contravention from the Income Tax Act, 1961.

12.This final report is submitted forthe kind consideration of Hon’ble

Court.”

(Emphasis supplied)

3. The aforesaid findings are taken on record, and the AO is discharged

from furt