NITIN REKHAN,KHARI BAOLI, DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, NEW DELHI , DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7638/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2026AY 2013-144 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that adding the profit again after it was already declared in the return of income amounts to double addition. Therefore, the addition made by the AO was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared profit from Bikri sales, which the AO treated as accommodation entries. Despite the profit being declared, the AO made an addition for the same amount as undisclosed income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of profit from alleged accommodation entries is permissible when such profit has already been declared and offered for taxation by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 28,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Manu Gawri, CA and Shri Madhav Gawri, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 24/06/2026

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.7638/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) Nitin Rekhan, DCIT, 6700, Khari Baoli, Central Circle-31, Delhi-110006. Vs. New Delhi. PAN-AADPR3790B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Manu Gawri, CA and Shri Madhav Gawri, Adv. Department by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR 07/04/2026 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 24/06/2026 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi dated 30.09.2025 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” in short) arising out of the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act dated 30.03.2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 18.03.2015 declaring total income at Rs.2,06,342/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, subsequent to the survey action u/s 133A of the Act carried out by the Investigation Wing in the case of the Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, it was found that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries of non-genuine purchases/sales including consignment/Bikri Sales through various concerns owned and operated by him. It was found that during the year under appeal assessee has

2 ITA No. 7638/Del/2025 Nitin Rekhan vs. DCIT taken the accommodation entry in the form of bogus Bikri through M/s Gayatri Maa Enterprises owned by Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta of Rs.16,05,826/-. Accordingly, after recording the reasons for reopening, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 after obtaining the approval from PCIT u/s 151 of the Act. Thereafter notice was issued u/s 148 on 19.01.2021. In response, the assessee has filed the return of income on 06.02.2022 declaring total income at Rs.2,06,340/-. The assessee submit that from the transactions of Bikri sales with M/s Gayatri Maa Enterprises he has earned profit of Rs.3,15,634/- which has already been declared in the return of income filed, therefore, no addition is required to be made. However, the AO has not accepted the contention of the assessee and made the addition of the profit of Rs.3,15,635/- as undeclared income u/s 28 of the Act and, accordingly, the total income was assessed at Rs.5,21,974/-. Against the said order, the appeal was filed before who vide impugned dated 30.09.2025 has dismissed the appeal.

3.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal by taking following the grounds of appeal: “1. The action of the Learned AO in reopening the assessment proceedings under section 147/148 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the facts of the case. 2. The action of the Learned AO in arbitrarily addition Rs.3,15,634.00 to the income of the appellant despite of the fact that Rs.3,15,634.00 has been already offered for taxation in the computation of income is illegal, arbitrary unjust and against the facts of the case. 3. The act of the Learned AO in enhancing the gross profit by Rs.3.15,634.00 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the facts of the case. 4. The Appellant craves leave to add, modify, alter, or delete any ground of appeal, till the appeal is heard and disposed off.”

4 Before us, with respect of grounds of appeal No.2 & 3, the Ld. AR submits that the assessee has already disclosed the profits of Rs.3,15,634/- from the Bikri

3 ITA No. 7638/Del/2025 Nitin Rekhan vs. DCIT sales of Rs.16,05,826/- and after claiming the deduction in Chapter VIA, has declared the income of Rs. 2,06,340/-. The Ld. AR submits that assessee had already declared profit of such alleged as accommodation entries, therefore, further addition of the same amount tantamount to double addition and, therefore, requested for the deletion of the same.

5.

On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities and submits that once it is established that the assessee has taken accommodation entries of Bikri sales, the income earned from such ingenuine sales in the shape of commission/gross profit should be separately assessed as undisclosed income of the assessee and, therefore, the AO has rightly made the additions and he requested for the confirmation for the same.

6.

Heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. In the instant case, the reopening of the case of the assessee was done on the basis of the information that assessee has obtained accommodation entry of Bikri sales from M/s Gayatri Maa Enterprises operated by one Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta engaged in providing accommodation entries for purchase/sales. It is further observed that the assessee has declared profit of Rs.3,05,633/- in the ITR field as on such Bikri sales of Rs.16,05,826/- made through M/s Gayatri Maa Enterprises. Despite of accepting such profits, the AO again made the addition of the said profit by treating it as undisclosed income of the assessee. Once the assessee has declared the profit from the sales of alleged Bikri sales in the ITR and after claiming the deduction available under Chapter VIA, has paid the taxes. Under these circumstances making further addition of the said profit as undisclosed income in the hands of assessee is double addition which is not permissible. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the

4 ITA No. 7638/Del/2025 Nitin Rekhan vs. DCIT addition made of Rs.3,15,634/- as the same has already been offered for tax by the assessee. Accordingly, ground of appeal Nos. 2 & 3 of the assessee are allowed.

7.

Since, we have already deleted the additions made, therefore, the legal ground of appeal No.1 taken by the assessee become academic and not adjudicated.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.06.2026.

Sd/- /- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANISH AGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.06.2026. *PK, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →