SAVITA DEVI,HARYANA vs. ITO-W-(2), ROHTAK, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4921/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 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 evidence. There was no actual evidence presented to support the allegation of on-money payment by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Revenue added Rs. 2,06,900/- to the assessee's income as on-money payment to a developer, based on incriminating material found during a search. The lower authorities upheld this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of on-money payment was based on sufficient incriminating material and evidence against the assessee.

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: 03.06.2026Pronounced: 03.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4921/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Savita Devi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Beri, Jhajjar, Ward -(2), Jhajjar Rohtak PAN: AVSPD0603M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Manoj Kumar, CA 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 2020-21, 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/250/2025-26/1085821956(1), dated 10.02.2026 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. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues in support of both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessments and lower appellate findings that the

ITA No.4921/Del/2026

assessee/appellant herein has rightly been assessed for having paid on-money of Rs.2,06,900/- 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.2,06,900/- which is hereby deleted in very terms. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2026

2 | P a g e

ITA No.4921/Del/2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 9th 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 →