JASMEET KAUR ANAND,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3817/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 July 2026AY 2014-20155 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 bank account belonged to the assessee's deceased husband and the income had been assessed in his hands previously. The assessment orders passed against the assessee were deemed illegal.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income for AY 2014-15. The department identified significant deposits in a bank account, leading to an addition of Rs. 2,34,45,000. The assessee contended that the bank account belonged to her deceased husband and the income was already assessed in his hands.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of bank deposits in the assessee's name is valid when the account belonged to her deceased husband and the income was already assessed in his hands.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Upender Bhat, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 27.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3817/Del/2026, A.Y. 2014-15 Jasmeet Kaur Anand Vs. Income Tax Officer, Azadpur Mandi, Ward 459(1), New Delhi 110033 New Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AIBPJ6148B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Upender Bhat, Advocate Respondent by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 27.07.2026 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:

The appeal filed by the Appellant/assessee is against order dated 19.12.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of assessment order dated 24.05.2023 of Ld. Assessing Officer / Assessment Unit (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant/assessee had not filed return of income for A.Y. 2014-15. As per specific information with the department, the

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 3817/Del/2026 Jasmeet Kaur Anand

Assessee made deposits / credits amounting to Rs. 2,34,45,000/- in her bank account. Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 19.07.2022, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 23.01.2023, show cause notice u/s 144 of the Act dated 02.05.2023 and 14.05.2023 were issued. But assessee failed to respond. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 24.05.2023 made an addition of Rs. 2,34,45,000/-. Against order dated 24.05.2023 of Ld. AO, the appellant/assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was allowed for statistical purposes setting aside assessment order and restoring the file to the file of Ld. AO vide order dated 19.12.2025.

3.

Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee preferred present appeal on following grounds:

“1. The worthy CIT (A) erred in law and facts of the case is not taking cognizance of the fact that the that Bank Account No. 1 000100100004358 of J&K Bank, Azadpur, Delhi belongs to late Shri Krishan Anand Singh (Husband of the assessee) not the appellant and stands assessed in his hands. 2. That the Worthy CIT (A) erred in law and facts of the case in not deleting the addition of Rs. 2,34,45,000/-which already stands assessed in the hands of her husband (late Shri Krishan Anand Singh). 3. That the worthy CIT (A) erred'in law and facts of the case in ignoring the cogent documents in support of her Written Submissions. Non consideration is against the principles of natural justice.” 4. Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) failed to notice that the account No. 000100100004358 of J&K Bank, Azadpur,

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 3817/Del/2026 Jasmeet Kaur Anand

Delhi belonged to Late Shri Krishan Anand Singh (husband of the assessee) who died on 26.04.2015. Shri Krishan Anand Singh had filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 5,02,910/- on 30.11.2014. The case was picked up for scrutiny through CASS for the reason substantial increase in capital in the year and low income compared to large commission receipts. The assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act, 143(3) of the Act on 23.12.2016. Against ex parte assessment order dated 23.12.2016, the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was filed which was allowed vide order dated 13.05.2019 deleting addition. The written submissions along with copy of order of ld. CIT(A) dated 13.05.2019 was submitted.

5.

Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned order.

6.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19.12.2025 setting aside the assessment order dated 24.05.2023 and restored the matter to the file of Ld. AO. Ld. AO vide order dated 24.05.2023 had made addition of Rs. 2,34,45,000/- u/s 69A of the Act for deposit in bank account No. 000100100004358 of J&K Bank, Azadpur, Delhi for assessment year 2014-15. The bank account was in the name of firm M/s. Krishan Anand Singh who is proprietor was Late Krishan Singh

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 3817/Del/2026 Jasmeet Kaur Anand

Anand S/o. Sant Singh Anand. Shri Krishan Singh Anand died on 26.04.2015. An ex parte assessment order dated 23.12.2016 was passed in the name of Shri Krishan Singh Anand which was setting aside by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 13.05.2019 copy of order dated 13.05.2019 is from page No. 6 to 14 and copy of bank certificate is at page No. 15 of paper book.

7.

In view of above material facts that especially the account in the name of firm operated by Shri Krishan Singh Anand during the assessment year 2014-15 order dated 13.05.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) setting aside ex parte assessment order dated 23.12.2016 in the name of Shri Krishan Singh Anand who had expired on 26.04.2015, passing of impugned orders dated 24.05.2023 by Ld. AO and 19.12.2025 by Ld. CIT(A) being illegal are set aside. Grounds of appeal are accepted.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27.07.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to:

P a g e | 5 ITA No. 3817/Del/2026 Jasmeet Kaur Anand

1.

Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →