ASHVEEN MALIK,JHAJJAR vs. ITO WARD -3, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1431/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 April 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 mere assumptions rather than specific incriminating material to prove the on-money payment. Consequently, the addition made by the Revenue was deleted.

What were the facts?

The Revenue alleged that the assessee paid on-money of Rs. 2,85,100/- to a developer based on search action findings. The lower authorities made this addition based on assumptions and presumptions.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of on-money payment was justified without specific incriminating material, and if the 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

For Appellant: CA (VC)
Hearing: 06.04.2026Pronounced: 06.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1431/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ashveen Malik Vs. ITO Ward-3 964/1 Priya Colony, Aayakr Bhawan Jhajjar-124001 Rohtak- 124001 Haryana Haryana PAN: BNZPM4574L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Navin Kumar Goyal, CA (VC) Department by Sh. Ravi Kant Chaudhary, Sr. DR Date of hearing 06.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 06.04.2026 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/250/2025-26/1083857997(1), dated 18.12.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.1431/Del/2026

2.

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. 2,85,100/- to the developer M/s. Omax group as per departmental authorities’ search action having found/seized the corresponding incriminating material 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 mere assumptions and presumptions than having discussed any specific 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 him. I thus find no merit in the impugned addition of Rs. 2,85,100/- which is hereby deleted in very terms.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.1431/Del/2026

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th April, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 16th April, 2026. Pooja Mittal/- 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 →