Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made under section 68/69A. The assessee had filed a cross-objection challenging the validity of the assessment itself, which was initiated for specific reasons but concluded on unrelated grounds.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had traveled beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny. The assessment was therefore not sustainable in law.
Key Issues
Whether the Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction by making additions on grounds beyond the limited scrutiny initiated.
Sections Cited
143(3), 68, 69A, 143(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Assessment Year: 2018-19 GSP Power Systems Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-10(1), 22, 3rd Floor, Main Market, New Delhi Moti Nagar, New Delhi PAN: AACCG0581H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by Ms. Suman Malik, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 03.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 03.06.2025 ORDER
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This Revenue’s appeal C.O. No. 40/Del/2024 for assessment year 2018- 19, 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/250/2023-24/1060727888(1), dated 09.02.2024, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
We notice at the outset that the assessee’s cross objection herein C.O. No. 40/Del/2024 goes to the root of the matter since challenging validity of the impugned assessment itself framed by the learned assessing authority on 31st May, 2021. This is for the precise reason that the assessee’s case was taken up for scrutiny on the twin issues of non-furnishing of quantitative details and “investments/advances/loans” whereas it ended up in adding an amount of Rs.12,59,97,711/- as unexplained cash credits under section 68/69A of the Act, which stands deleted in the lower appellate discussion. This is what leaves the Revenue and the assessee aggrieved who have filed their instant appeal and cross objection; respectively.