ADITI GROVER,DELHI V. ITO WARD 54(1), DELHI

ITA 4947/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Aditi Grover, an employee of TV-18 Broadcast Ltd., who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which confirmed the disallowance of exemptions and deductions claimed in her income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issues were the disallowance of exemption under section 10 for salary income and the disallowance of deduction for home loan interest. The Assessing Officer had initially disallowed these claims due to lack of supporting evidence, as the assessee did not respond to the initial queries. However, the Tribunal found that the claims were substantiated by the documents provided by the employer and the bank, leading to the decision in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841030 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: ROLI CHAUBEY
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Corroborative evidences; Salary income; TDS
• Section: 147; 148; 10

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4947/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aditi Grover, D-248, Defence Colony, New Delhi Vs. ITO, Ward-54(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AEQPG6827F Assessee by : Ms. Roli Chaubey, CA Revenue by: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 26/02/2026 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.4947/Del/2025 for AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 17/06/2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 29.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. The ground A raised by the assessee is challenging the confirmation of disallowance of exemption u/s 10 out of salary income. Ground B raised by the assessee is challenging the confirmation of disallowance of deduction claimed for home loan interest of Rs. 1,55,185/-. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is an individual deriving income from Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4947/Del/2025 Aditi Grover Page | 2 salary and had not filed the return of income for AY 2017-18 u/s 139(1) of the Act. The assessee’s name cropped up in the non-filer list. Based on TDS return filed by the employer, information was received by the ld AO that the assessee was in receipt of salary amounting to Rs. 85,85,253/-; the assessee had purchased motor vehicle which came to light from TDS return filed by the dealer in Form 26EQ amounting to Rs. 12,87,728/- and assessee had made payment towards credit card amounting to Rs. 21,62,871/- which got reflected in specified financial transaction by the credit card agencies. Based on this information, a letter was issued to the assessee on 17.03.2021 by the ld AO seeking explanation for nature and source of income for the aforesaid transactions. The assessee did not respond to the same. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was sought to be reopened vide issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021. The assessee filed the return of income on 28.04.2021 in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act declaring total income of Rs. 76,72,990/-. The reasons for reopening were duly supplied to the assessee. During the reassessment proceedings, the ld AO sought details of supporting evidence of deduction/ exemption claimed under the Act by the assessee in the return together with reconciliation of income declared in Form No. 16 and income shown in the ITR. The assessee is an employee of TV-18 Broadcast Ltd. The ld AO noticed from Form 16 issued by the employer that the assessee has claimed exemption / deduction of (i) HRA of Rs. 4,08,000/- ; (ii) house property loss of Rs. 1,55,185/- and (iii) other exemption of Rs. 1,99,079/- during the year under consideration. The ld AO noted that no supporting evidences were submitted by the assessee for claim of exemption on account of HRA of Rs. 4,08,000/-, claim of house property loss of Rs. 1,55,185/- and other exemption of Rs. 1,99,079/- and proceeded to disallow the same in the reassessment proceedings. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4947/Del/2025 Aditi Grover Page | 3 4. It is not in dispute that the assessee had resigned from service in February 2017 relevant to AY 2017-18 and had received terminal benefits. The other exemption of Rs. 1,99,079/- claimed by the assessee represent exemption claimed on account of transport allowance of Rs. 17,600/- (1600 X11 months), being the exemption for conveyance expenses from April 2016 February 2017 (11 months). The assessee had claimed leave salary exemption of Rs. 1,81,479/- which is also reflected in Annexure to From 16 issued by the employer. Both these figures i.e. Rs.1,81,479/- and Rs. 17,600 totaling to Rs. 1,99,079/- being exemption claimed by the assessee from the salary income are duly reflected in Form 16. Hence, we hold that assessee would be duly entitled for exemption of Rs. 1,99,079/- and there cannot be any addition to this effect as it is duly reflected in Form 16 issued by the employer itself. 5. The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs. 4,08,000/- on account of HRA which is also duly reflected in Form 16 and hence, the exemption is duly allowable to the assessee and there cannot any addition on this account. 6. We direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance made in the sum of Rs. 6,07,079/- on account of claim of exemption. Accordingly, the ground A raised by the assessee is allowed. 7. The assessee had indeed paid interest on her home loan amounting to Rs. 1,55,185/- during the year to HDFC Ltd. The assessee had enclosed the interest certificate at page 29 of the Paper Book from HDFC Ltd. This home loan is for Goa property owned by the assessee. Since, the place of employment of the assessee is different from Goa, the assessee would be entitled for HRA exemption of Rs. 4,08,000/- which had been adjudicated and allowed hereinabove and the home loan taken by the assessee is for Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4947/Del/2025 Aditi Grover Page | 4 Goa property which is not the place of residence for the assessee due to her occupation. The figure of interest of Rs. 1,55,185/- is not doubted by the ld AO. Hence, the interest paid on home loan of Rs. 155,185/- would be eligible for deduction under the head “income from house property” by treating the Goa property as self-occupied property which is permissible as per the statute. Hence, the assessee would be entitled for deduction of Rs. 1,55,185/- on account of interest paid on housing loan. Accordingly, the Ground B raised by the assessee is allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/02/2026. -Sd/- -Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26/02/2026 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "