Anupama Agarwal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
The appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi arose from an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 23 July 2025, concerning the assessment year 2018–19. The assessee, an individual, had filed her return electronically declaring a total income of ₹15,57,940. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS on two grounds: investment in immovable property and capital gains deduction claimed. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee had disclosed net long-term capital gains of ₹2,99,38,656 in Schedule CG and claimed deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act. The AO further identified that this figure included ₹17,21,385 from HDFC Mutual Fund capital gains. However, in the assessee’s return for the preceding assessment year 2017–18, no investment corresponding to this amount had been reported. Since the assessee did not substantiate the genuineness of the transaction, the AO denied the Section 54 deduction and treated ₹17,21,385 as unexplained investment under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE, completing the assessment at a total income of ₹32,79,330.
The assessee appealed to the NFAC. Before the CIT(A), she argued that the amount in question did not pertain to mutual fund capital gains but to the maturity proceeds of Unit Linked Insurance Policies (ULIPs). She submitted that the investment was not recorded in her books because the insurance premiums had been paid by her parents. According to her, the maturity proceeds were exempt under Section 10(10D) of the Act. She contended that even though the exemption had not been claimed in her return, the CIT(A) had the authority to entertain a fresh claim. She also challenged the denial of deduction under Section 54 and alleged violation of natural justice, stating that fresh evidence she submitted had not been duly considered.
