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

ITA 6283/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ms. Amita Handa, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which had confirmed an addition of Rs.28,03,201 to her income for the assessment year 2012-13. This addition was made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerning unexplained money. The Tribunal noted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the COVID-19 pandemic and thus condoned it. The core issue was the correctness of the addition made under section 69A, which the Tribunal found to be incorrectly applied as the amounts were received from her son, a relative, and were thus exempt under section 56(2) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789672 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation case (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: TANYA
• Section: 143(3); 56(2)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6283/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ms. Amita Handa, F.C. -27, Jot Floor, Hauz Khas, New Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(7), New Delhi PAN: AEEPH2743F (Appellant) (Respondent) 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 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6283/Del/2025 2 | P a g e 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. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6283/Del/2025 3 | P a g e 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th November, 2025 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24th November, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "