What did the High Court hold?

The High Court agreed with the Revenue's counsel to close the appeal. The court granted liberty to the Revenue to approach the court again if they fail in the proceedings against the company under the Black Money Act.

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that sustained the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition made to the assessee's income. The addition was made on a protective basis as a substantive addition was being pursued against a company where the assessee was a director and sole shareholder under the Black Money Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be closed with liberty to re-approach the court, considering ongoing proceedings against a related company under the Black Money Act.

PCIT vs Ashok Kumar Singh | Delhi High Court 2023

ITA 754/2023

Page 1 of 3

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Decision delivered on: 14.12.2023 + ITA 754/2023 & CM APPL. 64443/2023

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. 64443/2023 [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. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 40 days re- filing the appeal. 3. Having regard to the period involved, we are inclined to condone the delay. 4. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:03.01.2024 17:24:40 Signature Not Verified

ITA 754/2023

Page 2 of 3

ITA 754/2023 5. This appeal concerns Assessment Year [AY] 2014-15. 6. 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 „Tribunal‟]. 7. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “CIT(A)”], via the order dated 23.08.2021, deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO), albeit on protective basis, amounting to Rs. 2,75,75,955/- 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‟]. 8. The said order of the CIT(A) has been sustained by the Tribunal via the impugned order. 9. 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. 10. We tend to agree with Mr Bhatia. Accordingly, the appeal is closed with liberty as prayed for. 11. The registry will dispatch a copy of the order to the respondent/assessee via all modes, including email. The appellant/revenue Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:03.01.2024 17:24:40 Signature Not Verified

ITA 754/2023

Page 3 of 3

will also ensure that a copy of this order is served on the respondent/assessee.

RAJIV SHAKDHER JUDGE

GIRISH KATHPALIA

JUDGE

DECEMBER 14, 2023/rk

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:03.01.2024 17:24:40 Signature Not Verified

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

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments