ANITA,JHAJJAR, HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-3, ROHTAK , ROHTAK , HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5567/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2026AY 2020-213 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 relied on assumptions and presumptions rather than concrete incriminating material. There was no actual evidence presented against the assessee to support the on-money allegation.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 arose from proceedings under section 143(3)/147. The addition was made based on an alleged on-money payment of Rs. 5,25,000/- to a developer, found during a search action.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of on-money payment was substantiated by incriminating material, or based on assumptions and presumptions by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Adv. & Sh
Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

BEFORESHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.5567/Del/2026 Assessment Year:2020-21

ANITA, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H.NO. 2091, SECTOR-6 Ward -(3), JHAJJAR, Rohtak HARYANA-125507 PAN: AVXPA9437A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Saubhagya Agarwal, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv. Department by Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR Date of hearing 08.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 08.07.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises

against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National

Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN

Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2026-27/1088607217(1) dated

23.4.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3)/147 of the

Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Learned departmental representative vehemently argues in

support of both the learned lower authorities’ respective

ITA No.5567/Del/2026

assessments and lower appellate findings that the

assessee/appellant herein has rightly been assessed for having

paid on-money of Rs.5,25,000/- to the developer M/s. Omaxe

group as per departmental authorities’ action having

found/seized the corresponding incriminating material in search

action on 14.03.2022.

3.

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 against her. I thus find no merit

in the impugned addition of Rs.5,25,000/- which is hereby

deleted in very terms.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.5567/Del/2026

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 8th July, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23rd July, 2026. SR Bhatnagar 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 →