Dileep Kumar Dwivedi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Reassessment Survives, Addition Doesn’t:- Explained NRE Funds & Bank Loans—ITAT Delhi Deletes Property Investment Additions
Delhi ITAT ‘D’ Bench in Dileep Kumar Dwivedi vs ACIT, Ward 1(2)(2), Delhi (ITA No.347/Del/2025, AY 2015-16, order dated 23-12-2025) deleted additions relating to purchase of immovable property, holding that the source of investment stood duly explained through banking channels and loan documentation.
The assessee, a non-resident US citizen, was subjected to reassessment u/s 147 on the allegation of unexplained investment of ₹54.48 lakh in property and payment of ₹33.47 lakh during the year. Despite repeated notices, assessment was completed ex-parte and additions were made. Before ITAT, the assessee demonstrated that the entire consideration was routed through bank accounts, including SBI accounts (US & Ahmedabad), HDFC Bank loan, and repayment through SBI NRE account. The assessee also pointed out that additional evidence had been admitted by the DRP, but was ignored by the AO.
ITAT noted that the reconciliation of funds clearly established the source, and the AO’s approach of ignoring admitted evidence and DRP directions was unjustified and unsustainable. Accordingly, additions of ₹54.48 lakh / ₹33.47 lakh were set aside on merits. The assessee’s additional jurisdictional grounds challenging reopening were not pressed and hence dismissed.
Key takeaway: Where property investment is backed by verifiable bank trails and loan records, additions for unexplained investment cannot be sustained, even in reassessment proceedings; merits prevail over procedural lapses
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
