What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) had adequately rebutted the details and documents filed by the assessee. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for verification.

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which upheld the disallowance of loss from the sale of shares and a portion of expenses. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) had considered the share trading transactions as bogus based on an investigation wing report.

What were the issues?

Whether the share trading transactions were bogus and if the assessee's claim for loss from the sale of shares and expenses was admissible.

M/S Aarken Advisors Pvt. Ltd… vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 02/02/2026Pronounced: 04/05/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI)

BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

(PHYSICAL HEARING) ITA No. 5935/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19)

Aarken Advisors Private Limited, V ITO, 108, Ist Floor Madangir, s WRD 1(1), New Delhi 110062 CR Building, PAN: AAFCA1990F New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. S. Krishnan, Advocate Revenue by Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement 04/05/2026

ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM : The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of

Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless

Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated

05.08.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

Grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are as under:

The order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 05.08.2025 is wrong on facts and bad in law, and therefore, it is illegal;

2 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

That the Ld. CIT erred in upholding the loss of the appellant at Rs.1,75,192/-against the returned loss of Rs.3,31,59,242/-; 3. The Id. CIT(A) erred in upholding disallowance of loss from sale of Shares of Rs.3,26,91,098/- is not admissible;

The Id. CIT(A) erred in upholding the in disallowance of expenses amount of Rs.2,92,952/-{25% allowed of total expenses of Rs.3,90,602/- (Travelling and other expenses Rs.3,73,162/- & Business Promotion Expenses Rs. 17,440/-).

All these grounds are without prejudice to one another;

The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, modify,or substitute any ground during the course of hearing the appeal.

Duringproceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee

was asked to file a brief synopsis which he has filed. This synopsis

is on the line of the arguments he had made during the hearing of

this case, the same is reproduced as under:-

3 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

4 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

5 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

6 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

7 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

8 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities

below,

Appeal on ground No.3, which is the only effective ground,

relates to disallowance of business loss of Rs. 3,26,91,098/-

incurred by the Assessee on the sale of shares of M/s Virtual Global

Education Ltd (‘VGEL’). The Assessing Officer as well as the Ld.

CIT(A) have held that the share trading transactions of the Assessee

are bogus. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee also argued that

although Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) have relied heavily on

9 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

the report received from the Investigating Wing but they have not

considered the details and documents filed by the Assessee either

during the assessment proceedings or during the appellate

proceedings.

Keeping in view the facts discussed above and the arguments

and written submissions of the Assessee, we find that neither the

Assessing Officer in the assessment order nor the Ld. CIT(A) have

rebutted the details filed by the Assessee. We, therefore, are of this

considered view that the matter should be remanded back to the file

of the Assessing Officer with the direction to verify the claim of the

Assessee on the basis of documents and details filed by him. The

Assessing Officer should also look into the norms of the sale and

purchase of the VGEL share, their time stamped contact notes, SIT

paid and the confirmation by the Assessee brokers as we find that

theses aspects have not been considered either by the Assessing

Officer or by the Ld. CIT(A).

With these directions, the case is remanded back to the file of

the AO for denovo assessmenton merits, after duly considering the

10 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

submissions and evidences that may be furnished by the Assessee,

as well as the material available on recordNeedless to add, the

Assessing Officer shall afford adequate and reasonable opportunity

of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to

extend full cooperation in the remand proceedings. All grounds and

contentions available under law are kept open. Ordered accordingly.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04th May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (KRINWANT SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Date:- 04 .05.2026 Rkk/r.N Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

11 ITA No. 5935/Del/2025

M/S AARKEN ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments