Nagalakshmi Devineni Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Addition Based Solely on 132(4) Statement Deleted – Third-Party Statement Without Corroboration Has No Evidentiary Value – ITAT Hyderabad
ITAT deleted additions made u/s 69A relating to alleged higher purchase consideration of agricultural land, holding that the AO relied solely on statements recorded u/s 132(4) without any independent corroborative evidence. The addition was based on a tentative statement of the assessee’s son estimating land value, while the registered consideration was duly supported by banking transactions and documents. Tribunal noted that WhatsApp chats were not relied upon by lower authorities and, in any case, lacked mandatory sec.65B certification, making them inadmissible electronic evidence.
Relying on PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd., ITAT held that even statements recorded during search cannot by themselves constitute incriminating material and cannot sustain additions in absence of corroboration. Applying the same principle across all connected appeals, the Tribunal deleted additions in all three years and allowed the appeals.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
The captioned three appeals are filed by Ms Nagalakshmi Devineni, Sri Venkat Devineni and Sricharan Devineni (“the assessees”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. CIT(A)”), all dated 16.06.2025 for the A.Y.2023-24, A.Y.2021-22 and A.Y.2022-23 respectively. Since the issues involved in these appeals are identical, they are heard together and one consolidated order is being passed for the sake of brevity.
