RAJ KUMAR JHA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 29(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7337/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2026AY 2024-252 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's explanation that the additional amount was received from his wife. The Revenue did not dispute that the cash amount originated from another person.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an addition of Rs. 22,38,100/- made by the lower authorities. The assessee claimed this amount was received from his wife, Smt. Nutan Kumari, in various tranches.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the lower authorities on account of unexplained cash credit is justified when the assessee provided an explanation of the source of funds from his wife.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 18.08.2026Pronounced: 18.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 7337/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2024-25 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Raj Kumar Jha RZ-51, Ground Floor, Ward-29(1), Hauz Khas, Civic Centre, New Delhi- 16 New Delhi- 02 PAN: AIOPJ0800B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ankur Aggarwal, CA Department by Sh. Mangali Venkata Ramesh, Sr. DR Date of hearing 18.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 18.08.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2024-25, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2026-27/1089238951(1), dated 27.05.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance canvasses in his instant appeal it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have rejected his explanation of having received the

ITA No.7309/Del/2026 additional amount in question of Rs. 22,38,100/- as coming from his wife Smt. Nutan Kumari.

3.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel invites the tribunal’s attention to the assessee’s paperbook page no. 20 given list of the 11 occasions of having received the impugned sum in various tranches right from 05.04.2023 to 19.01.2024 Mrs. Nutan Kumari representing her auto sweep, salary and over draft facility against FDR; as the case may be. It is deemed appropriate to emphasize here that this is not the Revenue’s best case that the assessee had received any cash amount from any other person. The tribunal therefore finds merit in the assessee’s foregoing explanation and deletes the impugned addition of Rs. 22,38,100/- in very terms therefore.

4.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.08.2026. Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23.09.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi 2 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →