THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 762 / 2023HC Delhi14 December 20232 pages
For Petitioner: RUCHIR BHATIA
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court agreed with the revenue's counsel to close the appeal with liberty to refile if the proceedings against the company under the Black Money Act fail. The deletion of the addition by the CIT(A) and sustained by the ITAT was not substantively adjudicated.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against an ITAT order that sustained the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition made on a protective basis. The addition related to funds in a company where the assessee was a director and sole shareholder, which was being proceeded against under the Black Money Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT correctly sustained the deletion of a protective addition when substantive proceedings were ongoing under the Black Money Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 3 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

ITA 762/2023

Page 1 of 2

$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Decision delivered on: 14.12.2023 + ITA 762/2023

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Pratyakash Gupta, Standing Counsel.

versus

ASHOK KUMAR SINGH

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R

14.12.2023

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM APPL. 64808/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal] 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal on behalf of the appellant/revenue. 2. Having regard to the period involved the delay in condoned. The application is disposed of. ITA 762/2023 3. This appeal concerns Assessment Year [AY] 2013-14. 4. Via the instant appeal the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 19.04.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:03.01.2024 17:24:40 Signature Not Verified

ITA 762/2023

Page 2 of 2

„Tribunal‟]. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “CIT(A)”] vide order dated 23.08.2021 deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO), albeit on protective basis, amounting to Rs. 2,43,11,824/- on the ground that a substantive addition was being made against the company in which the respondent/assessee was a director and a sole shareholder, i.e., Everbez Business Inc. [in short „Everbez‟]. The record shows that Everbez was being proceeded under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 [in short „2015 Act‟]. 6. The said order of the CIT(A) has been sustained by the Tribunal via the impugned order. 7. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel states that the best way forward would be to close the instant appeal, with liberty to the appellant/revenue to approach the Court, in case the appellant/revenue were to fail in the proceedings taken out against the respondent/assessee, concerning Everbez under the 2015 Act. 8. We tend to agree with Mr Bhatia. Accordingly, the appeal is closed with liberty as prayed for. 9. The registry will dispatch a copy of the order to the respondent/assessee via all modes, including email. The appellant/revenue will also ensure that a copy of this order is served on the respondent/assessee. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J. DECEMBER 14, 2023/rk Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:03.01.2024 17:24:40 Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →