What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had indeed mentioned incorrect facts in its order. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which dismissed their appeal. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) had misrepresented the facts of the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by misstating the facts of the case.

Sawhney Brothers vs ACIT | s.250 | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Shri Raghuveer Singh, Sr. DR

Hearing: 01.07.2026Pronounced: 01.07.2026

PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 19.12.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 1498/Del/2026 Sawhney Brothers, Delhi

to as ‘the Act’) arising out of assessment order dated 28.03.2016 of the Ld. Assessing Officer/ Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 52(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2013- 14.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by completely changing facts of the case. So the matter may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A).

Ld. Departmental Representative had no objection.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19.12.2025 mentioned wrong facts in para No. 5 contrary to the facts of the case.

In view of above material facts, in the interest of justice, the impugned order dated 19.12.2025 of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 1498/Del/2026 Sawhney Brothers, Delhi

Order pronounced in the open court on 01.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13.07.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

SAWHNEY BROTHERS , DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 52 (1), 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