AARTI ARORA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 45(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5237/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 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 found that the lower authorities made the addition based on assumptions and presumptions, without discussing any incriminating material directly linking the assessee to the alleged on-money payment. Consequently, the addition was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns an addition of Rs. 1,31,100 made on account of alleged 'on-money' payment to a developer. The addition was based on material seized during a search action, but the lower authorities relied on assumptions rather than direct evidence against the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of 'on-money' payment is sustainable without direct incriminating material against the assessee, and if lower authorities relied on assumptions instead of evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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: 07.07.2026Pronounced: 07.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5237/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Arti Arora, Vs. Income Tax Officer, M-50, 2nd Floor, Ward-45(1), Rajouri Garden, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ABTPA1366R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Mohit Sachdeva, CA Department by Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR Date of hearing 07.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 07.07.2026 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/250/2025-26/1085012717(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. 2. Delay of 38 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).

ITA No.5237/Del/2026

3.

The only issue pressed by the learned counsel is regarding on- money of Rs.1,31,100 paid to M/s. Omaxe group. 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.1,31,100/- to the developer M/s. Omaxe group as per departmental authorities’ action having found/seized the corresponding incriminating material in search action on 01.04.2021. 4. 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 actual evidence against the assessee to buttress the on-money allegation. I thus find no merit in the

2 | P a g e

ITA No.5237/Del/2026

impugned addition of Rs.1,31,100/- which is hereby deleted in very terms. No other ground or argument has been pressed. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th July, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29th 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 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →