PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SUBHASH DABAS

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 73 / 2023HC Delhi09 February 20232 pages
For Petitioner: ZOHEB HOSSAIN
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the issue was covered by a previous decision of a coordinate bench. Consequently, no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that deleted additions made under Section 68 and Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT had allowed the assessee's cross-objections, finding no incriminating material against the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred in deleting additions made under Section 68 and Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act in the absence of incriminating material.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 2(22)(e)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 73/2023

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel.

versus

SUBHASH DABAS

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

09.02.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL.6306/2023 1. This is an application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay in re-filling the appeal. 2. According to the appellant, there is delay of 187 days. 3. For the reasons given in the application, the delay is condoned. 4. The application is disposed of. ITA 73/2023 5. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2008-2009. 6. This appeal is directed against the order dated 02.09.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short “Tribunal”]. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue, and allowed the cross-objections filed by the respondent/assessee.

ITA 73/2023

page 1 of 2 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 14:15:41

7.

The revenue had preferred the appeal before the Tribunal to assail the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), whereby deletion of addition of Rs.15,18,06,000/- made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”] on account of unsecured loans, and the deletion of the addition amounting to Rs.78,05,000/- under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act made by the Assessing Officer was ordered. The Tribunal, via the impugned order, ruled against the revenue, and allowed the cross-objections, on the ground that no incriminating material was found against the respondent/assessee. 8. Mr Zoheb Hossain, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that the issue raised presently stands covered by the decision of the coordinate bench of this Court rendered in Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-III v.Kabul Chawla[2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). 9. In these circumstances, the appeal is closed, as no substantial question of law arises for our consideration.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

FEBRUARY 9, 2023 / tr

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 73/2023

page 2 of 2

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 14:15:41

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →