BIMLA SHARMA,SHALIMAR BAGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5766/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2026AY 2019-203 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had successfully proved the source of her investments as savings in her bank account. Therefore, the investments could not be treated as unexplained in her hands.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned investments in debentures amounting to Rs. 21.77 lakhs, which were held as unexplained by the lower authorities. The assessee presented bank statements showing a closing balance of Rs. 14,56,189 as of March 31, 2018, followed by subsequent deposits and investments.

What were the issues?

Whether the investments in debentures were unexplained in the hands of the assessee, and if the source of these investments was adequately demonstrated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 16.07.2026Pronounced: 16.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5766/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Bimla Sharma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, AN-42D, MIG Flats, New Delhi Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi PAN: BHOPS3831B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Jatin, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 16.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 16.07.2026 ORDER 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/250/2025-26/1084457802(1), dated 06.01.2026 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.5766/Del/2026

2.

Delay of 53 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. It transpires during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessments and the lower appellate findings holding her investments in debentures amounting to Rs.21.77 lakhs as unexplained under section 69A of the Act which forms the sole subject matter of the tribunal’s apt adjudication both. 4. Both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned addition. Coming to the source of the impugned investment, learned counsel invited the tribunal’s attention to the assessee’s bank statement indicating her closing balance as on 31st Marh, 2018 amounting to Rs.14,56,189/- thereby forming opening balance as on 01.04.2018 which followed the deposits of Rs.51,000/- and investments made on 11.04.2018 with M/s. Muthoot Finance to the tune of Rs.15 lakhs. This followed yet another investments of Rs.10 lakhs made on 28th March, 2019. There is no entry in the said bank statement

2 | P a g e

ITA No.5766/Del/2026

which has been held as unexplained in both the lower proceedings. It is thus concluded that the assessee has successfully proved the source of her impugned investments as her savings in her bank account, which could not be treated as unexplained in her hands. Deleted accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th July, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st July, 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

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →