Kavita Samtani Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Jaipur recently issued a ruling in the appeal filed by Smt. Kavita Samtani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2016-17. This case underscores the issues surrounding undisclosed income and investments, as well as the handling of evidentiary documents discovered during search operations under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Background and Key Findings
Smt. Kavita Samtani, the appellant, had her initial return assessed at Rs. 214,800, which was later revised under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act. Her residence, along with her husband’s business premises, were subject to a search and seizure operation on March 29, 2018. The investigation led to two main additions in her income assessment totaling Rs. 12,74,600, which was challenged in this appeal.
Details of the Investigation
During the search at her residence in Bhilwara, documents related to financial transactions, property purchases, and business dealings were seized. Notably, these included ledger accounts from M/s Mohan Broker Agency and M/s Hari Om Agency, which were analyzed as part of the investigation.
1. Addition of Rs. 54,000 in M/s Mohan Broker Agency’s Ledger
Documents seized during the search included ledger accounts related to M/s Mohan Broker Agency, where an entry for a credit of Rs. 54,000 was observed. Although the appellant argued that the agency was managed by her husband, Mr. Deepak Samtani, and that she had no connection to the business transactions, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the credited sum of Rs. 54,000 could not be explained. Consequently, the AO classified this as an undisclosed investment under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act.
