DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. AKINCHAN DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7024/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 April 2026AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that there was no merit in the Revenue's grounds seeking to revive the protective additions. The Section 56(2)(viib) addition was also found to be the same as the Section 68 addition.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of 'protective' additions made on account of alleged accommodation entries and a Section 56(2)(viib) addition. The CIT(A) had deleted these additions because substantive additions were already confirmed in another assessee's hands.

What were the issues?

Whether 'protective' additions can be revived when substantive additions have already been confirmed elsewhere. Whether a Section 56(2)(viib) addition is distinct when it relates to the same issue as a Section 68 addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 147,Section 56(2)(viib),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 06.04.2026Pronounced: 29.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 7023 & 7024/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Akinchan Developers Pvt Ltd. Income Tax E-1032, Saraswati Vihar, Central Circle-3 Delhi-92 Room No. 333 ARA Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-55 PAN/TAN: AAGCA8716J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by None (Adjournment Application Rejected) Department by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 06.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 29.04.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These Revenue’s twin appeals involving the sole assessee herein M/s Akinchan Developers Pvt. Ltd.; ITA 7023 & 7024/Del/2025, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-23 [in short, “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders dated 29.08.2025, passed in DINs & Order Nos. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1080177744(1) & ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1080179610(1), involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 & section 143 of the

ITA No.7023 & 7024/Del/2025 Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, respectively. 2. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s/respondent’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex- parte.

3.

It is next noticed with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that its identical substantive ground in both these cases seek to revive “protective” additions of Rs. 1,83,36,600/- and Rs. 2,02,23,567/- made on the basis of alleged accommodation entries coupled with section 56(2)(viib) addition amounting to Rs. 1,42,29,156/- in the latter assessment order; respectively.

4.

It is in this factual backdrop that the Revenue could hardly dispute that the learned CIT(A) had deleted the impugned identical protective additions in both these assessment years for the sole reason that the corresponding substantive additions already stood confirmed in Shri Satyender Kumar Jain hands. So far as the latter section 56(2)(viib) addition is concerned, the learned CIT(A) has indeed elaborated the fact that it was nothing but the aforesaid section 68 addition only which had also been made as unjustified share premium under the latter provision. We thus see no merit in

2 | P a g e

ITA No.7023 & 7024/Del/2025 either of these Revenue’s grounds pleaded in both these appeals seeking to revive the “protective” additions herein in very terms. Rejected accordingly. No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.

5.

These revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 7023 & 7024/Del/2025 are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026 .

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.04.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →