DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,DELHI-8, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI vs. POOJA MITTAL, DELHI

ITA 1336/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 February 2026AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI C.N. PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition. The Tribunal found no valid reasons to reverse the CIT(A)'s findings, which were based on the fact that the agreement to sell was not proven to be executed and the subsequent sale was to a different party.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 7,20,00,000/- under Section 69A as unexplained money based on an agreement to sell found during a survey. The assessee claimed the land was sold for Rs. 40 lakhs through a registered sale deed to a different entity.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of unexplained money under Section 69A was justified based on an unauthenticated agreement to sell, when the actual sale transaction was to a different entity for a lower declared consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 133A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 29.01.2026Pronounced: 17.02.2026

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC dated 05.12.204 for A.Y. 2014-15 in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained money u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was carried out at the premises of Sh. Navneet Dawar, Sh. Anil Narang ( Proprietor of M/s. Unique Associates)

and Sh. Gurvinder Duggal and the said search and seizure operation many related party transaction were found and proceedings u/s.133A of the Act were initiated on various assesses. Accordingly, a survey operation u/s. 133A was carried out at the premises of M/s. Narang Properties Prop. Anil Narang and during the co

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →