DCIT, CC-05, NEW DELHI vs. SANJAY GUPTA, NEW DELHI

At the time of hearing of the instant appeal Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the Ld. AO made protective addition in the hands of the assessee before us, whereas substantive addition was made in the case of Ritesh Kumar Gupta for A.Y. 2015-16, which was ultimately challenged before the ITAT and the Coordinate Bench by and under its order dated 19.03.2025 in has deleted such addition, which was found to have been made in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of assessment; reference of any incriminating material was not reflecting in the assessment order.

Having regard to this particular aspect of the matter the order impugned dated 9.2.2021, as challenged by the Revenue whereby and where-under considering the fact of confirmation of addition of Rs. 9,32,76,252/- in the hands of Shri Ritesh Kumar Gupta, where addition was made on substantive basis, protective addition of the same amount made in the hands of the appellant has acceptable. Such submission on the factual aspect has not been controverted by the ld. DR. Hence, having regard to this particular fact of substantive addition made in the hands of Ritish Kumar Gupta, which has been deleted by the ITAT for the year under consideration, as narrated herein above, the protective addition in the hands of the assessee before us does not survive. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting such addition is, therefore, found to be in order, not warranting any interference. The appeal preferred by the Revenue is thus, dismissed.

In view of our finding in Revenue’s appeal, the C.O. preferred by the assessee has also become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly. cross-objection in CO No. 77/Del/2023 are dismissed.