Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 520/2024, CM APPL. 60232/2024 & CM APPL. 60233/2024
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, DELHI .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate.
versus
M/S ADVANTAGE FASHION PVT. LTD. .....Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
O R D E R %
14.10.2024 1. The Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act), impugning an order dated 30.11.2023, passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter the ITAT) in a batch of appeals and cross-appeals preferred by the Revenue and the Assessee, for the assessment years (hereafter AY) 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. 2. The present appeal relates to the Revenue’s appeal being ITA No. 797/Del/2017 for the AY 2009-10, which was rejected by the learned ITAT, in terms of the common order, impugned in the present appeal. The Revenue has projected the following questions, for consideration of this Court: “A. Whether the Ld. ITAT was correct in deleting the additions of Rs.6,97,45,648/- made on account of interest income camouflaged as sale/purchase by the assessee ignoring the documents seized and nature of agreement? This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:02:35
B. Whether the Ld. ITAT was correct in deleting the additions of Rs.6,97,45,648/- made on account of interest income camouflaged as sale/purchase by the assessee ignoring the fact that no sale / purchase agreement of property contains clauses pertaining to corporate guarantee, personal guarantee, post-dated cheques etc?
C. Whether the Ld. ITAT was correct in deleting the additions of Rs.6,97,45,648/- made on account of interest income camouflaged as sale/purchase by the assessee ignoring the statement of Mr. Naveen Choudhary, CFO who admitted that the amount advanced to M/s Vatika Group is actually loan amount?”
Similar questions are also projected by the Revenue in connected appeals arising from the common impugned order. This Court had, in ITA 517/2024, considered the controversy involved in the present case and had found that no substantial question of law arises. The decision rendered in ITA 517/2024 would also cover the controversy covered in the present appeal. 4. The present appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J OCTOBER 14, 2024/at
Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:02:35