IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.716/Del/2025, A.Y. 2021-22 Madhu Bala Gupta, Dy. Commissioner of Income L/H of Late Sh. K. K. Gupta, Tax, Central Circle-31, 452/2, Bhola Nath Nagar, Vs ARA Building, Shahadra, New Delhi-32 Jhandewalan Extension, PAN: AAFPG1315B New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by Sh. Mukul Gupta, CA Sh. Yogendra Kumar Gupta, CA Sh. Nitin Jindal, CA Respondent by Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 17/11/2025 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM This appeal of assessee for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2021-22 is directed against the order dated 28.01.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-30, New Delhi [‘CIT(A)’].

2. Vide 10 grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged not only the legality of the assessment order but also on the merit, i.e. the genuineness of addition of Rs.2,90,05,500/- under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee [Late Sh. Krishna Kumar Gupta (Date of 09.05.2021)] filed his original Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year on 31.12.2021 declaring income of Rs.48,66,480/-. The case was picked up for scrutiny; hence, the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) issued notice dated 30.06.2022 under section 143(2) of the Act to the deceased assessee (Late Sh. Krishna Kumar Gupta).

3.1 Meanwhile, search and seizure operations under section 132 of the Act were carried out on 06.01.2021 in Hans Group of cases, wherein various incriminating materials were seized. Based on the information received from the Ld. AO of the searched person, the Ld. AO of assessee initiated assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act on 30.01.2023 in case of the assessee through legal heir. In response to the notice issued under section 153C of the Act, the assessee through legal heir filed the ITR on 13.02.2023 declaring income of Rs.48,66,480/-. The case was scrutinized and consequential assessment was done at income of Rs.3,38,71,980/- after making the addition of Rs.2,90,05,500/- as unexplained investment based on WhatsApp chat of Sh. Vaibhav Jain with Sh. Gopal Mittal (husband of one of the sellers; Mrs. Reena Mittal). During the search and seizure operations under section 132 of the Act on the premises of Sh. Parveen K Jain & M/s. Jainco Ltd. on 06.01.2021, the data of mobile phone of Sh. Viabhav Jain were forensically extracted, which revealed that Sh. Viabhav Jain had sent a WhatsApp message/ image relating to sale of property at 41, Shankar Vihar, New Delhi at Rs.8,00,11,000/- to Shri Gopal Mittal, husband of one of the sellers of the above mentioned property. As per the registered sale deed of the said property, the assessee had purchased the said property (50% share) along with his son for Rs.2,20,00,000/-. However, as per the above-mentioned seized WhatsApp data of mobile phone of Sh. Viabhav Jain, the actual purchase consideration of the said property was Rs.8,00,11,000/-. Hence, the difference of Rs.5,80,11,000/- (Rs.8,00,11,000/- minus Rs.2,20,00,000/-) was taxed in the hands of the assessee @ 50%. Dissatisfied with the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but did not succeed. Hence, this appeal is here.

4. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel contended that the notice dated 30.06.2022 issued under section 143(2) of the Act to the deceased assessee was not legally sustainable. Hence, the same was dropped. Later, the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act were initiated on 30.01.2023 in case of the assessee through Legal Heir after recording satisfaction to do so. However, the consequential assessment initiated under section 153C of the Act, as per tabular details on first page of the assessment order, was completed under section 143(3) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AR argued that the said assessment order was