ANSHU GARG,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 7 (1), DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6676/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sh. Anshu Garg, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 260 Janta Flat GTB Enclave, Ward-7(1), Dilshad Garden, Delhi North East Delhi – 110093, Delhi PAN: DDGPG6695R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Naresh Singh Rathore, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 04.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 04.08.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, 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/250/2025-26/1084994496(1), dated 21.01.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.6676/Del/2026

2 For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 78 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive ground raised herein, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate discussion have held the assessee to have invested a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in cash in M/s. Bhutani group of companies. It is made clear that the learned departmental representative appears to have carried out a search action in the alleged recipient group on 04.01.2024. It is on the basis of same alleged material not specified in the assessment or in the lower appellate findings that the impugned addition has been made in the assessee’s hand. 4. Both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned addition. This tribunal sought to verify both the assessment as well as lower appellate discussion as to what specific material has been discovered against the assessee so as to add the sum in issue of Rs.5 lakhs in his hands. No such evidence has seen like till date in the department

2 | P a g e

ITA No.6676/Del/2026

favour. I, therefore, see no merit to uphold the impugned addition of Rs. 5 lakhs made in the assessee’s case. Deleted accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 4th August, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 21st September, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e