ANTARTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 13, DELHI

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6527/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY Vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME LIMITED, TAX, Plot No.4B, Tricone Towers, Mayur Central Circle 13, Delhi 110005. Vihar, District Centre, Phase-1, New Delhi 110091. PAN No. AALCS5114R Appellant Respondent & ITA No.6528/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY Vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME LIMITED, TAX, Plot No.4B, Tricone Towers, Mayur Central Circle 13, Delhi 110005. Vihar, District Centre, Phase-1, New Delhi 110091. PAN No. AALCS5114R Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri V.P. Gupta, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashok Gautam, CIT DR Date of hearing: 06.07.2026 Pronouncement on 07.08.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These are the batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17. ITA No.6527 arises from order dated 26.08.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED “the Act”), by Ld. CIT(A), Delhi-26. ITA No.6528 arises from order dated 25.08./2025, passed u/s 250 of the Act by Ld. CIT(A), Delhi-26.

1.1 For the sake of convenience both these appeals are being disposed of through a single order. In this case, a search and seizure operation was conducted on the Sanjay Bhaskar Group of Companies on 30.03.2021. During the course of such search proceedings, it was found that allegedly there was a bogus provision in the profit and loss account of the assessee company to artificially lower the fair market value of its shares. For AY 2015-16 the Ld. AO completed the assessment at a loss of Rs.11,72,50,817/- u/s 153(3) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. Incidentally this assessment was completed at a figure of loss which was declared by the assessee in its return of income. Secondly, for AY 2016-17 the returned income of Rs.1,46,870/- was enhanced to Rs.58,52,770/- by the Ld. AO.

1.2 The assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) with several grievances, the main one being that the Ld. AO’s action was claimed to be devoid of merit on the ground that the same were not based on any seized material. Apart from this the assessee is also seen to have pleaded that there was denial of opportunity at the level of Ld. AO. It is seen that before the Ld. CIT(A) four opportunities of hearing were provided to the assessee but there was no response to such opportunities by the assessee. The fact of non-attendance is recorded on page 6 of the impugned order for AY 2015-16 and on page 7 of the impugned order for

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED AY 2016-17. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and affirmed the orders of Ld. AO for both the years.

1.3 The aggrieved assessee has approached the ITAT and has filed revised grounds of appeal for both the years. The first two grounds challenge the action of Ld.AO in respect of the fact that the additions have been made without there being any incriminating material recovered from the search action. In this regard reliance has been placed on the case of Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023) reported in 454 ITR 212 (SC). Apart from challenging the action of Ld. AO on this ground there is also ground no.3 in both the appeals through which the denial of opportunity at the level of Ld. CIT(A) has been ventilated as a grievance.

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED material seized during the course of search action. It was averred that the assessee could not comply to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant. The Ld. AR also argued that the assessee deserved an opportunity to cross-examine and seek clarification from the persons from whom the allegedly incriminating documents were recovered. The Ld. AR also assailed the findings of Ld. AO on merits by stating that none of the additions or observations of the Ld. AO in either of the years was sustainable in the face of the explanation available with the assessee for the impugned actions of the Ld. AO.

2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below and stated that the Ld. AO’s order was detailed and based on the seized material available to him for both the assessment years under consideration. It was the submission that the assessee’s non-compliance before this Ld. CIT(A) for both the years was not easily understood and thereafter the assessee could not justifiably claim any denial of opportunity.

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED impugned actions are as a result of incriminating material seized during the course of search and seizure or are is based on some readily available material which would be a part of the details filed with the return of income. We are also aware that for AY 2015-16 the Ld. AO has accepted the figure of loss returned by the assessee while completing the assessment order. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned orders for both the years and remand both these matters to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) would specifically look into the challenge mounted by the assessee regarding the impugned actions being d’hors any incriminating material seized during the course of search and seizure action. For this purpose the Ld. CIT(A) would remain mindful of the case of Abhisar Buildwell (supra). The assessee would do well to present his grievance before the Ld. CIT(A) and in case required, a remand report can be directed to be submitted by the Ld. AO.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 07.08.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.

ITA Nos.6527 & 6528/Del/2025 ANTARCTICA PROPERTIES COMPANY LIMITED Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI