INCH AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON HARYANA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) GURGAON, HARYANA (NOW ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), GURGAON HARYANA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWALAssessment Year: 2016-17 Inch Automation Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 164, Sector 6, IMT Manesar, Haryana Vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Gurgaon PAN: AAICM1149D (Appellant)
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, 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/250/2024-25/1071037305(1), dated
09.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Assessee by Ms. Amrin Pathan, CA
Department by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Date of hearing
11.08.2025
Date of pronouncement
11.08.2025
2 | P a g e
It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities herein have treated the assessee’s share capital/premium amount of Rs.3,35,94,000/- as unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act in assessment order dated 24.12.2018 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 3. Learned counsel submits in this factual backdrop that the assessee has filed its additional evidence application dated 4th August, 2025 under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 seeking to place on record all the relevant details of the investor/subscriber herein, namely, Mr. Li for the entire amount of Rs.3,35,94,000/-. The assessee’s case accordingly is that it was on account of various communication gaps etc. that it could not plead and prove the foregoing facts before both the learned lower authorities. 4. The Revenue’s on the other hand could hardly dispute that the assessee’s above additional evidence goes to the root of the matter since seeking to place on record the entire details of its investor Mr. Li. 5. Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant additional 3 | P a g e evidence as well as the main appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication preferably within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that it shall be the appellant’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in appellate proceedings. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11th August, 2025 (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 22nd September, 2025. RK/-