What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence as it was crucial for a proper decision. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration based on these new documents.

The assessee's agricultural land was acquired, and they sought to submit additional evidence related to compensation and interest. This evidence was not available during the assessment or initial appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether additional evidence, not available during assessment, should be admitted for deciding the appeal. The issue also involves the credit of TDS on enhanced compensation.

Satpal, Rewari vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri Arpit Goyal, CA

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Hearing: 14.07.2026

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 30.01.2026 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld AR of the assessee submitted additional evidence as per Rule 31 and submission of a case law in support of Ground No.V . He submitted that the agriculture land of the assessee was acquired,

2 ITA No.3473/DEL/2026

however detailed sheet along with letter from LAO confirming the amount of compensation on acquired land and interest thereon were not received by the assessee earlier which has now been collected from the Land Acquisition Officer. He submitted that this sheet along with letter/documents further supports claim of the assessee that the interest reflecting in Form 26AS is in nature of interest on enhanced compensation itself. He submitted that these documents as an additional evidence during the hearing on 14.07.2026 before the ITAT, SMC Bench are submitted and requested that these additional evidence submitted may be accepted. He further submitted that also the assessee has raised Ground No.V for credit of TDS reflecting in the Form 26AS of the assessee which has not been provided by the Assessing Officer while computing the demand on the addition made. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench passed in case of Manoj Kumar Soman vs Circle 3(1) Mumbai delivered on 14.05.2026 and a copy of this order is placed on record. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. I observed that assessee has filed additional evidence, as stated above, at the time of

3 ITA No.3473/DEL/2026

hearing of the appeal and these additional evidences were not available with the assessee at the time of assessment proceedings and also at time of passing the appellate order. I am of the considered view that these additional evidences are essential for deciding the issue in right perspective as per law, hence the same are admitted. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the matter be restored to the file of AO to consider the additional evidences and decide as per law. Accordingly, I hold and direct accordingly. Needless to mention that assessee should be given an opportunity of being heard and the assessee is directed to submit all the additional evidences at the time of proceedings before the lower authorities. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 14thday of July, 2026.

Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 18.08.2026 TS

4 ITA No.3473/DEL/2026

SATPAL,REWARI vs. ITO WARD 2, REWARI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments