SHIVANI TYAGI,SONIPAT HARYANA vs. WARD-1, SONEPAT, SONEPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5296/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of past savings and withdrawals by the assessee, a housewife allegedly deriving tuition income. It granted a further lump sum relief of Rs. 2 lakhs, stating it should not be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2019-20 was against an order involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144. The CIT(A) had granted partial relief to the assessee, considering the possibility of past savings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly granted partial relief considering the assessee's income and potential past savings. Whether a further lump sum relief is justified in the peculiar facts of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Pronounced: 07.07.2026

आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, �द�ली अिधकरण �द�ली �द�ली पीठ� �द�ली पीठ� पीठ�, नई पीठ� नई नई �द�ली नई �द�ली �द�ली �द�ली INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 5296/DEL/2026 िनधा�रणवष�/AssessmentYear:2019-20) SHIVANI TYAGI WARD-1, SONEPAT HOUSE NUM 290 NEAR DAV SONIPAT, HARYANA-131001 SCHOOL SONIPAT SECTOR-15, Vs. SONIPAT, HARYANA-131001 अपीलाथ�Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: BKOPT9406Q

अपीलाथ��ारा/Appellant represented by: Ms. Sauhani, CA (VC) ��थ��ारा/Respondentrepresented by: Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of conclusion of hearing: 07.07.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of pronouncement: 07.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre/learned CIT(A), New Delhi’s order in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083054906(1) dated 27.11.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA 5296/DEL/2026 SHIVANI TYAGI

2.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation

averments, delay of 100 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.

The learned counsel for the assessee at the outset invites the

tribunal’s attention to the learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate

discussion granting part relief to the assessee; reading as under:-

I have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant has brought no evidence on record regarding tuition income derived by her. However, the AO has started his computation from the returned income of Rs. 2,15,180/-, which has been arrived at by considering a profit of 30% on gross tuition income of Rs. 7,00,000/-. If the AO makes a further addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- u/s 69A, then it becomes a case of double taxation of the same income. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 2,15,180/-should stand excluded in computing total income. I also consider that past savings is not an antinormal phenomenon and an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- is a very nominal account which may be considered as being out of past savings of the appellant. Therefore, a further relief of Rs. 2,00,000/- is allowed to the appellant. In the result, the appellant gets a total relief of Rs. 4,15,180/-. The remaining addition is confirmed. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.

4.

Suffice to say, it is come on record that although the learned

CIT(A) has rejected the assessee’s tuition income in principle, he

has still granted part relief which forms subject matter of stand

before the tribunal

5.

Be that as it may, possibility of accumulated past savings

and withdrawals followed by re-deposits in such an instance of a

ITA 5296/DEL/2026 SHIVANI TYAGI

housewife allegedly deriving tuition income could not be

altogether ruled out as well. This tribunal therefore deems it

appropriate in these peculiar facts that a further lump sum relief

of Rs.2 lakhs to the assessee would be just and proper with a

rider that the same shall not be treated as precedent. Necessary

computation shall follow as per law.

6.

The assesee’s appeal is partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 7th July, 2026.

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st July, 2026. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ 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 →