ASPRI SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8396/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2026AY 2023-248 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by admitting additional evidence without giving the AO an opportunity to examine it, violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee and revenue filed cross-appeals against the CIT(A)'s order. The CIT(A) had deleted additions made by the AO concerning unsecured loans and trade payables, partly based on additional evidence. The AO had made additions under Section 68 and disallowed expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without providing the AO an opportunity to examine it, thus violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT- DR)
Hearing: 16/04/2026Pronounced: 19/05/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24

Aspri Spirits Private Limited, National Faceless Appeal Centre 1203 Riana Business Centre, (NFAC) / DCIT 4(1)(1), Kanakia Wall Street Andheri Vs. Room No. 640, Aaykar Bhavan, East, Chakala, Mumbai - Maharishi Karve Marg, Mumbai – 400093, Maharashtra. 400020, Maharashtra. PAN NO. AAECA 8483 E Appellant Respondent

ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24

Ms. Pragya Jat, Aspri Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income 1203 Riana Business Centre, Vs. Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Mumbai, Kanakia Wall Street Andheri- Room No. 642, 6th Floor, East, Chakala, Mumbai – Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 400093, Maharashtra. Mumbai - 400 020, Maharashtra. PAN NO. AAECA 8483 E Appellant Respondent

: Shri Vimal Punmiya Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT- DR) Revenue by

Date of Hearing : 16/04/2026 Date of pronouncement : 19/05/2026

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 2 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

These cross appeal appeals by the assessee and assessee and Revenue are directed against order dated directed against order dated 09.10.2025, passed by the Ld. passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income ner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year [in Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year [in Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year [in short ‘the AY’] 2023-24 24.

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal in its appeal are reproduced as under: reproduced as under:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of case and in On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred law, the Ld. CIT has erred in confirming the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. AO under Section in confirming the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. AO under Section in confirming the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. AO under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act which is passed against the principal of 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act which is passed against the principal of 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act which is passed against the principal of natural justice. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in making an Adhoc disallowance of Rs. 50,00,000/ has erred in making an Adhoc disallowance of Rs. 50,00,000/ has erred in making an Adhoc disallowance of Rs. 50,00,000/- out of the total expenses of Rs. 39,04,04,000/ expenses of Rs. 39,04,04,000/- for the expenses paid for business promotion for the expenses paid for business promotion on estimation basis. on estimation basis. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add amend and or delete any of the above Appellant craves leave to add amend and or delete any of the above Appellant craves leave to add amend and or delete any of the above grounds of Appeals.” ” 3. The grounds raised by the Revenue 3. The grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal in its appeal are reproduced as under: reproduced as under:

“1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,07,1 justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,07,12,000/ ,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Income Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 towards unsecured loan tax Act, 1961 towards unsecured loan received from Sunrise Petroleum Services, by holding that identity. received from Sunrise Petroleum Services, by holding that identity. received from Sunrise Petroleum Services, by holding that identity. creditworthiness and genuineness were creditworthiness and genuineness were proved, despite the AO's finding that proved, despite the AO's finding that the lender was a loss the lender was a loss-making entity and source of funds remained unverified? making entity and source of funds remained unverified? 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in allowing the deduction of interest 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in allowing the deduction of interest 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in allowing the deduction of interest expenditure of Rs.11,19,013/ expenditure of Rs.11,19,013/- claimed by the assessee u/s 37(1) claimed by the assessee u/s 37(1) after accepting the unsecured loan as genuine, when the Assessing Officer had held accepting the unsecured loan as genuine, when the Assessing Officer had held accepting the unsecured loan as genuine, when the Assessing Officer had held that the assessee failed to prove the utilization of the loan for business that the assessee failed to prove the utilization of the loan for business that the assessee failed to prove the utilization of the loan for business purposes and the loan itself was unverified? purposes and the loan itself was unverified?

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 3 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

3.

Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) 3. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the was correct in deleting the addition of Rs.54,32,900/ addition of Rs.54,32,900/- made u/s 68 in respect of trade payables made u/s 68 in respect of trade payables pertaining to M/s ASK Agencies & Investment Pvt. Ltd., when according to the pertaining to M/s ASK Agencies & Investment Pvt. Ltd., when according to the pertaining to M/s ASK Agencies & Investment Pvt. Ltd., when according to the AO the party ledger reflected only advance payment and no outstanding AO the party ledger reflected only advance payment and no outstanding AO the party ledger reflected only advance payment and no outstanding balance, thereby rendering the creditor balance unverifiable? eby rendering the creditor balance unverifiable? 3.1 Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting 3.1 Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting 3.1 Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A(3) of the the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A(3) of the the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A(3) of the Income-tax Rules, without providing an opportun tax Rules, without providing an opportunity to the Assessing Officer, ity to the Assessing Officer, as required under Rule 46A(1) of the Income as required under Rule 46A(1) of the Income-tax Rules. 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in deleting the addition of Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in deleting the addition of Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs.7,04,77,565/-made u/s 68 of the Income made u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act towards trade payables tax Act towards trade payables in the name of M/s Moet Henness in the name of M/s Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., despite the assessee's y India Pvt. Ltd., despite the assessee's failure before the AO to produce confirmations, ITRs, audited financials or failure before the AO to produce confirmations, ITRs, audited financials or failure before the AO to produce confirmations, ITRs, audited financials or complete invoices from the said party, as mandated for proving identity, complete invoices from the said party, as mandated for proving identity, complete invoices from the said party, as mandated for proving identity, creditworthiness and genuineness under Section 68? creditworthiness and genuineness under Section 68? 4.1. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule deleting the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule deleting the addition by admitting additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A(3) of the Income tax Ru Income tax Rules, without providing an opportunity to the les, without providing an opportunity to the Assessing Officer, as required under Rule 46A(1) of Assessing Officer, as required under Rule 46A(1) of the Income the Income-tax Rules. 5. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT( he facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the A) was justified in deleting the AO's application of Section 115BBE on additions made u/s 68, despite the A AO's application of Section 115BBE on additions made u/s 68, despite the A AO's application of Section 115BBE on additions made u/s 68, despite the AO recording that the assessee failed to discharge the onus under Section 68, recording that the assessee failed to discharge the onus under Section 68, recording that the assessee failed to discharge the onus under Section 68, and whether CIT(A) erred in concluding that Section 115BBE was not applicable in whether CIT(A) erred in concluding that Section 115BBE was not applicable in whether CIT(A) erred in concluding that Section 115BBE was not applicable in the case? 6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in law in restricting the ad Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in law in restricting the ad Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in law in restricting the ad-hoc disallowance to Rs. 50,00,000/ disallowance to Rs. 50,00,000/- instead of Rs. 3,90,40,400/ instead of Rs. 3,90,40,400/- (10% of Incentives and Promotion Incentives and Promotion Expenses) made u/s 37(1) by the Assessing Officer Expenses) made u/s 37(1) by the Assessing Officer on the basis of non-furnishing of invoices, contracts, TDS applicability details -furnishing of invoices, contracts, TDS applicability details furnishing of invoices, contracts, TDS applicability details and complete supporting documents, without verifying whether the assessee and complete supporting documents, without verifying whether the assessee and complete supporting documents, without verifying whether the assessee had actually substantiated the genuineness and busi had actually substantiated the genuineness and business purpose of such ness purpose of such large-scale expenditure? scale expenditure? 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the above The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the above The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the above grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing, in the interest of grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing, in the interest of grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing, in the interest of justice.” 4. Briefly stated, the facts borne out from the record are that the Briefly stated, the facts borne out from the record are that the Briefly stated, the facts borne out from the record are that the assessee, a private limited company engaged in the business of assessee, a private limited company engaged in the business of assessee, a private limited company engaged in the business of import, trading and distribution of liquor, filed its return of import, trading and distribution of liquor, filed its return of import, trading and distribution of liquor, filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income o income for the year under consideration declaring total income o income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs.25,83,98,310/-. . . The The The return return return was was was selected selected selected for for for scrutiny scrutiny scrutiny

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 4 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

assessment and, in the assessment framed under Section 143(3) assessment and, in the assessment framed under Section 143(3) assessment and, in the assessment framed under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), the the the Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer made, made, made, inter inter inter alia, alia, alia, the the the following following following additions/disallowances: (i) addition of Rs.1,07,12,000/ llowances: (i) addition of Rs.1,07,12,000/ llowances: (i) addition of Rs.1,07,12,000/- under Section 68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loan received from Section 68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loan received from Section 68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loan received from the proprietary concern of one of the Directors of the assessee the proprietary concern of one of the Directors of the assessee the proprietary concern of one of the Directors of the assessee- company; (ii) disallowance of interest expenditure amounting to company; (ii) disallowance of interest expenditure amounting to company; (ii) disallowance of interest expenditure amounting to Rs.11,19,013/- under Section 37 of the Act; (iii) addition of under Section 37 of the Act; (iii) addition of under Section 37 of the Act; (iii) addition of Rs.7,59,10,465/- towards trade payables under Section 68 of the towards trade payables under Section 68 of the towards trade payables under Section 68 of the Act; and (iv) ad-hoc disallowance of 10% of incentive and hoc disallowance of 10% of incentive and hoc disallowance of 10% of incentive and promotion promotion promotion expenses expenses expenses amounting amounting amounting to to to Rs.3,90,40,400/ Rs.3,90,40,400/ Rs.3,90,40,400/-. Consequently, the total income of t Consequently, the total income of the assessee was assessed at he assessee was assessed at Rs.38,51,80,188/-.

5.

Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld. CIT(A)”], the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld. CIT(A)”], the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld. CIT(A)”], who granted substantial relief to the assessee. The additions who granted substantial relief to the assessee. The additions who granted substantial relief to the assessee. The additions made under Section 68 in respect of unsecured loans and trade 68 in respect of unsecured loans and trade payables, as well as the disallowance of interest expenditure, payables, as well as the disallowance of interest expenditure, payables, as well as the disallowance of interest expenditure, were deleted. Insofar as the disallowance relating to incentive and were deleted. Insofar as the disallowance relating to incentive and were deleted. Insofar as the disallowance relating to incentive and promotion expenses is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the promotion expenses is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the promotion expenses is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs.50,00,000/ .50,00,000/- as against Rs.3,90,40,400/ as against Rs.3,90,40,400/- made by the Assessing Officer. Being dissatisfied, both the made by the Assessing Officer. Being dissatisfied, both the made by the Assessing Officer. Being dissatisfied, both the assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before the assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before the assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal.

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 5 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

6.

At the outset, one of the principal grievances raised by the At the outset, one of the principal grievances raised by the At the outset, one of the principal grievances raised by the Revenue is that the Ld. Revenue is that the Ld. CIT(A) admitted and relied upon CIT(A) admitted and relied upon additional evidences in contravention of Rule 46A of the Income additional evidences in contravention of Rule 46A of the Income additional evidences in contravention of Rule 46A of the Income- tax Rules, 1962, without affording the Assessing Officer an tax Rules, 1962, without affording the Assessing Officer an tax Rules, 1962, without affording the Assessing Officer an adequate opportunity to examine or rebut the same. During the adequate opportunity to examine or rebut the same. During the adequate opportunity to examine or rebut the same. During the course of hearing, both parties fairl course of hearing, both parties fairly conceded that substantial y conceded that substantial documentary evidences, which were not part of the assessment documentary evidences, which were not part of the assessment documentary evidences, which were not part of the assessment record, had indeed been furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) and record, had indeed been furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) and record, had indeed been furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) and formed the basis of the appellate relief granted to the assessee. formed the basis of the appellate relief granted to the assessee. formed the basis of the appellate relief granted to the assessee.

7.

We have carefully considered the rival We have carefully considered the rival submissions and submissions and perused the material available on record. From a perusal of the perused the material available on record. From a perusal of the perused the material available on record. From a perusal of the impugned appellate order, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has impugned appellate order, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has impugned appellate order, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has extensively relied upon various documentary evidences, including extensively relied upon various documentary evidences, including extensively relied upon various documentary evidences, including confirmations, bank statements, income tax ack confirmations, bank statements, income tax acknowledgements, nowledgements, financial statements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans financial statements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans financial statements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans and other supporting documents furnished by the assessee and other supporting documents furnished by the assessee and other supporting documents furnished by the assessee during appellate proceedings, while deleting the additions made during appellate proceedings, while deleting the additions made during appellate proceedings, while deleting the additions made under Section 68 of the Act and while substantially r under Section 68 of the Act and while substantially r under Section 68 of the Act and while substantially reducing the disallowance of incentive and promotion expenses. disallowance of incentive and promotion expenses.

7.1 In respect of unsecured loans received from M/s Sunrise In respect of unsecured loans received from M/s Sunrise In respect of unsecured loans received from M/s Sunrise Petroleum Services, the Ld. CIT(A) recorded findings on the basis Petroleum Services, the Ld. CIT(A) recorded findings on the basis Petroleum Services, the Ld. CIT(A) recorded findings on the basis of fresh evidences relating to the identity and creditworthiness o of fresh evidences relating to the identity and creditworthiness o of fresh evidences relating to the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the transaction, including the lender and genuineness of the transaction, including the lender and genuineness of the transaction, including financial statements, bank statements, Form 16, Form 26AS and financial statements, bank statements, Form 16, Form 26AS and financial statements, bank statements, Form 16, Form 26AS and confirmations. Similarly, while deleting additions relating to trade confirmations. Similarly, while deleting additions relating to trade confirmations. Similarly, while deleting additions relating to trade

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 6 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

payables standing in the names of M/s ASK Agencies & payables standing in the names of M/s ASK Agencies & payables standing in the names of M/s ASK Agencies & Investments Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., vt. Ltd. and M/s Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., vt. Ltd. and M/s Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., reliance reliance reliance was was was placed placed placed upon upon upon confirmations, confirmations, confirmations, income income income-tax acknowledgements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans acknowledgements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans acknowledgements, reconciliations, invoices, delivery challans and banking records furnished during appellate proceedings. and banking records furnished during appellate proceedings. and banking records furnished during appellate proceedings. Likewise, in relation to incentive Likewise, in relation to incentive and promotion expenses, the Ld. and promotion expenses, the Ld. CIT(A) took cognizance of detailed reconciliations, transaction CIT(A) took cognizance of detailed reconciliations, transaction CIT(A) took cognizance of detailed reconciliations, transaction- wise analyses, ledgers and supporting invoices which admittedly wise analyses, ledgers and supporting invoices which admittedly wise analyses, ledgers and supporting invoices which admittedly were not subjected to examination by the Assessing Officer. were not subjected to examination by the Assessing Officer. were not subjected to examination by the Assessing Officer.

7.2 The scheme of Rule 46A embodies a salutary principle of The scheme of Rule 46A embodies a salutary principle of The scheme of Rule 46A embodies a salutary principle of natural justice. Though the appellate authority possesses powers natural justice. Though the appellate authority possesses powers natural justice. Though the appellate authority possesses powers to admit additional evidence in appropriate circumstances, such to admit additional evidence in appropriate circumstances, such to admit additional evidence in appropriate circumstances, such power is circumscribed by the statutory obligation to provide the power is circumscribed by the statutory obligation to provide the power is circumscribed by the statutory obligation to provide the Assessing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine the sing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine the sing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence so admitted, to conduct necessary enquiries and to evidence so admitted, to conduct necessary enquiries and to evidence so admitted, to conduct necessary enquiries and to furnish rebuttal, if any. Compliance with Rule 46A is not a mere furnish rebuttal, if any. Compliance with Rule 46A is not a mere furnish rebuttal, if any. Compliance with Rule 46A is not a mere procedural formality but a substantive safeguard intended to procedural formality but a substantive safeguard intended to procedural formality but a substantive safeguard intended to preserve fairness in adjudication. in adjudication.

7.3 In the present case, the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) is In the present case, the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) is In the present case, the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) is founded substantially upon additional evidences admittedly not founded substantially upon additional evidences admittedly not founded substantially upon additional evidences admittedly not examined by the Assessing Officer. The record does not reveal examined by the Assessing Officer. The record does not reveal examined by the Assessing Officer. The record does not reveal that any effective remand opportunity was granted to the that any effective remand opportunity was granted to the that any effective remand opportunity was granted to the Assessing Officer to verify the authenticity, correctness and icer to verify the authenticity, correctness and icer to verify the authenticity, correctness and evidentiary value of such documents. Once the appellate evidentiary value of such documents. Once the appellate evidentiary value of such documents. Once the appellate authority intended to rely upon those materials for reversing the authority intended to rely upon those materials for reversing the authority intended to rely upon those materials for reversing the

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 7 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

findings recorded in assessment proceedings, adherence to the findings recorded in assessment proceedings, adherence to the findings recorded in assessment proceedings, adherence to the mandate of Rule 46A bec mandate of Rule 46A became imperative.

7.4 In our considered opinion, the failure to afford the Assessing In our considered opinion, the failure to afford the Assessing In our considered opinion, the failure to afford the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine the additional evidences has Officer an opportunity to examine the additional evidences has Officer an opportunity to examine the additional evidences has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice and has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice and has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice and has rendered rendered rendered the the the impugned impugned impugned appellate appellate appellate findings findings findings procedurally unsustainable. At the same time, since the evidences furnished unsustainable. At the same time, since the evidences furnished unsustainable. At the same time, since the evidences furnished by the assessee may have material bearing on adjudication of the by the assessee may have material bearing on adjudication of the by the assessee may have material bearing on adjudication of the issues involved, the ends of justice would be best served by issues involved, the ends of justice would be best served by issues involved, the ends of justice would be best served by restoring the entire controversy to the file of the As restoring the entire controversy to the file of the Assessing Officer sessing Officer for fresh consideration. for fresh consideration.

7.5 Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) on all issues under challenge and restore the matter to the CIT(A) on all issues under challenge and restore the matter to the CIT(A) on all issues under challenge and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall examine file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall examine file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall examine the additional evidences furnished by the assessee, conduct such ences furnished by the assessee, conduct such ences furnished by the assessee, conduct such enquiry or verification as may be deemed necessary and enquiry or verification as may be deemed necessary and enquiry or verification as may be deemed necessary and thereafter adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law thereafter adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law thereafter adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all extend full cooperation and furnish all requisite documents and explanations as may be called for by the requisite documents and explanations as may be called for by the requisite documents and explanations as may be called for by the Assessing Officer during the set Assessing Officer during the set-aside proceedings.

ITA No. ITA No. 8396/MUM/2025 & 8 ITA No. 8643/MUM/2025 Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, Aspri Spirits Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

8.

In the result, the appeals filed by both the assessee and the In the result, the appeals filed by both the assessee and the In the result, the appeals filed by both the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statis Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on ounced in the open Court on 19 19/05/2026.

Sd/- Sd/ Sd/- (ANIKESH BANERJEE ANIKESH BANERJEE) (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 19/05/2026 Kunal Kumar, P.S.

Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.

BY ORDER, BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →