ACIT CIRCLE-28(1). NEW DELHI., NEW DELHI vs. PRENIT WORLD LLP, NEW DELHI

The Revenue pleads the following substantive ground in appeal ITA No. 1392/Del/2025:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. of Rs.2,50,76,931/- on account of addition made by the Assessing officer u/s 68 even though the onus of evidence regarding unsecured loan has not been discharged including loan confirmation, creditworthiness of lender party despite opportunity given by the AO repeatedly.

We not advert to the Revenue’s sole endeavor in its instant appeal seeking to revive the Assessing Officer’s action inter alia making section 68 unexplained cash credits addition in the assessee’s hands which stands reverse in the CIT(A) detailed discussion.

Learned counsel representing assessee at this stage seeks to buttress the point for the sake of brevity that the CIT(A) impugned order has accepted the assessee’s explanation of genuineness and creditworthiness of the impugned alleged unexplained cash credits going by the Assessing Officers remand report itself dated 11.03.2020 which duly forms part of records before us. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the Assessing Officer had very fairly concluded in the said remand report that the assessee had inter alia filed confirmations of the parties concerned who duly responded to section 133(6) notices as well. There is not even as adverse comment in the said remand

Faced with this clinching factual position, we hereby quote CIT v. D.M. Purnesh (2020) 426 ITR 169 (Karn)(HC) and Smt. B. Jayalakshmi v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (2018) 96 taxmann.com 486 (Madras) that the Revenue could not be treated even as an aggrieved party once the learned Assessing Officer himself submits a favourable remand report in the assessee’s case. We thus find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievances directed against the learned CIT(A) detailed lower appellate discussion deleting the impugned section 68 unexplained cash credits addition made in the assessee’s hands in the light of the Assessing Officer’s remand report. Its appeal 392/Del/2025 stands rejected in very terms.

The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 196/Del/2025 stands supportive of the CIT(A) impugned lower appellate findings stand rendered infructuous. No other ground or argument has been pressed.

This Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 1392/Del/2025 is dismissed and the assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 196/Del/2025 is dismissed as rendered infructuous in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.