VINEET KUMAR ARORA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD 2, FARIDABAD

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4104/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Vineet Kumar Arora, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 311, Housing Board Colony, Ward-2, Sector -10, Faridabad Faridabad PAN: ANPPA0654C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Mukesh Jain, CA Sh. Samyak Jain, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 03.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 03.06.2026 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2023-24, 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/250/2025-26/1088186375(1), dated 31.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee herein canvasses his twin substantive grounds in the instant appeal challenging both the learned lower

ITA No.4104/Del/2026

authorities’ respective findings inter alia making section 68 unexplained cash credits addition of Rs.5,35,000/- and further disallowance of HRA payment of Rs.1,39,464/- under section 10(13A). 3. Both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the foregoing twin issues. Suffice to say, the assessee had received the impugned sum of Rs.5,35,000/- and filed their respective bank statements, PAN details as well as Income Tax Returns etc. to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness thereof. The Revenue could hardly dispute that apart from raising their respective technical objections, both the learned Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) have not even questioned the same in their respective findings. It is in this factual backdrop that the tribunal finds merits in the assessee’s case that his impugned credits could not have been treated as unexplained in both the learned lower proceedings. Deleted therefore in very terms. 4. The outcome would be hardly any different regarding the assessee’s HRA disallowance as well since he had duly placed on record the corresponding rent payment receipt as well as all the

2 | P a g e

ITA No.4104/Del/2026

requisite details coming from the landlord’s side. Deleted accordingly. No other ground or argument has been pressed. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 14th 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