ASHOK KUMAR MITTAL HUF,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7462/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities relied on assumptions and presumptions rather than concrete incriminating material to support the on-money allegation. Consequently, the addition was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2019-20 arose from an assessment under section 147. The addition of Rs. 25,00,000 was made on account of alleged on-money payment to a developer based on material seized during a search.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of on-money payment was substantiated by incriminating material, or based on assumptions and presumptions by the revenue authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,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

For Appellant: Adv. Ms. Aditi Garg, CA
Hearing: 19.08.2026Pronounced: 19.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, 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/250/2026-27/1090462750(1) dated 25.06.2026

ITA No. 7462/Del/2026

involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

Learned departmental representative vehemently argues in support of both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate findings that the assessee/appellant herein has rightly been assessed for having paid on-money of Rs.25,00,000/- to the developer M/s. Omaxe group as per departmental authorities’ action having found/seized the corresponding incriminating material in search action on 14.03.2022.

3.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective vehement submissions against and in support of the impugned addition. There is hardly any dispute between the parties that both the learned lower authorities have more gone by their respective assumptions and presumptions than having discussed any incriminating material indicating the assessee to have made the impugned on-money payment to the searched party in question. It is further emphasized that there is no indication in the assessment order or in the lower appellate discussion discussing any 2

ITA No. 7462/Del/2026

actual evidence against the assessee to buttress the on-money allegation. I thus find no merit in the impugned addition of Rs.25,00,000/- which is hereby deleted in very terms.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19 August, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25/08/2026. Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →