LUOR NANO TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 15(2), NEW DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “E’’ : NEW DELHI)

BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5057/Del/2025 Asstt. Year : 2016-17 M/s Luxor Nano Technology Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle 15(2), 229, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 020 (PAN: AABCL7115P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Sh. Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR.

Date of Hearing 29.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 03.07.2026

ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-30), New Delhi dated 25.06.2025 in appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-5/10193/2018-19 pertaining to assessment year 2016-17. Assessment in this case was framed by the ACIT, Circle 15(2), New Delhi u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 25.12.2018.

2 2. The first issue in this appeal of the assessee is as regards to the order of the CIT(A) confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act in violation of CBDT Instruction F.No. 225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.6.2017. For this, assessee has raised the following Ground No. 2:- “2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 26.9.2017 is invalid, bad in law and liable to be quashed being the same was issued in violation of CBDT Instruction F.NO. 225/157/2017/ITA-II( dated 23.06.2017.”

3 4. The next issue on merits is as regards the order of the CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs. 50 lacs being loan transaction from alleged entry provider shell company u/s. 68 of the Act. For this, assessee has raised ground nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 which are argumentative, hence, need not be repeated. 5. We have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We have gone through the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and noted that the order of the CIT(A) is of 58 pages and page no. 1 to 42 is the reproduction of either of the assessment order or the grounds of appeal; Page No. 42 to 54 are the reproduction of assessee’s written submissions; Page No. 55-56 is actually adjudication wherein simplicitor the CIT(A) has discussed only the Investigation Report of Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata on the alleged entry provider. We have gone through the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and noticed that there is no speaking order or proper adjudication on actual facts of the assessee’s case, thus, we have no other alternative except to set aside the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) to give a proper finding on the facts of assessee’s case and adjudicate the issue by passing a speaking order. In terms of above, we restore back the issue in dispute to the file of the CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh and pass a speaking order on the issue in dispute, after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

4 6. Coming to issue of disallowance of interest paid of Rs. 92,213/- u/s. 36(1)(iii) and addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- being estimation of commission u/s. 69C of the Act, both the additions are related to the above loan entry of Rs. 50 lacs. Since we have already remitted back the issue of loan of Rs. 50 lacs to the file of the CIT(A), as aforesaid, for fresh adjudication, thus, this connected issue of addition of Rs. 92,213/- and Rs. 1,50,000/- also stand remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the aforesaid similar directions for fresh adjudication. 7. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Dated:03.07.2026 SR BHATANGAR