AMITA HANDA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 28(7), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6283/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 November 2025AY 2012-133 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the Covid-19 pandemic period. It also deleted the addition made under Section 69A, finding merit in the assessee's explanation of remittances from her son.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay, which the CIT(A) refused to condone. The delay occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic period. The substantive issue involved an addition made under Section 69A based on remittances from the assessee's son.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned considering the pandemic period. Whether the addition made under Section 69A for remittances from a relative is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 69A,Section 56(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 441 ITR 722
    441 ITR 722 · 2022 · SC
    162 citing

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Ms. Tanya, Adv
Hearing: 24.11.2025Pronounced: 24.11.2025

Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ms. Amita Handa, Vs. Income Tax Officer, F.C. -27, Jot Floor, Ward-28(7), Hauz Khas, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AEEPH2743F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Tanya, Adv. Sh. Harshit Chauhan, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 24.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.11.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, 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/250/2025-26/1080155527(1), dated 29.08.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset that the learned CIT(A) has refused to condone the delay of 386 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 18.12.2020 against the assessment order passed on 29.11.2019. The Revenue could hardly dispute that most of the foregoing intervening period between the date of assessment order to that of the institution of the assessee’s lower appeal falls in Covid-19 pandemic outbreak which has already been declared to be exempted for all intents and purposes from 15th March, 2020 to 28th February, 2022 in the light of In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation case (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC). The impugned delay stands condoned.

3.

Next comes the sole substantive issue between the parties regarding correctness of section 69A addition amounting to Rs.28,03,201/- made by both the learned lower authorities. The assessee has filed the relevant bank instruments indicating remittances of Rs.11.35 lakhs on 27th April, 2011; Rs.10,02,468/- on 6th September, 2011 and Rs.7.62 lakhs on 29th October, 2011; from her son Mr. Akhil Handa. It is thus concluded that once the legislature has itself treated such amounts as exempt since involving the satisfied category or relatives under section 56(2) of the Act, no merit is found in the impugned addition of Rs.28,03,201/- which stands deleted in very terms.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →