IMPERIAL EXPORT,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 52(1), DELHI, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3743/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 August 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO's file, granting the assessee one final opportunity to substantiate its claims. The AO was directed to decide the issue afresh after considering the evidence and the assessee's cooperation.

What were the facts?

The assessee firm declared an income of Rs. 14,28,780/- for AY 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions of Rs. 54,65,38,900/- due to the assessee's failure to provide details of creditors and purchase bills.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO was justified in treating creditors as bogus and making additions without proper opportunity for the assessee to furnish evidence, especially when additional evidence was sought to be produced.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI

Before: SH. SUDHIR KUMAR & SH. MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadawa, Adv, Shri Karitkey Gupta, Adv
For Respondent: Shri K. Hauthang, CIT- DR
Hearing: 18/08/2026Pronounced: 24/08

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SH. SUDHIR KUMAR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. MANISH AGARWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3743/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Imperial Export Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- D-I/24 Vasant Vihar -1, 52(1) Delhi South West Delhi-110057 New Delhi PAN No. AADFI0063L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Appellant by Shri Ajay Wadawa, Adv. Shri Karitkey Gupta, Adv. Respondent by Shri K. Hauthang, CIT- DR

Date of hearing: 18/08/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 24/08 /2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. NFAC)”] vide order dated 09-03-2026 pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18, arising out the assessment order dated 03-12- 2019 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee firm filed its return of income on 28-03-2018 declaring an income of Rs.14,28,780/-. The case of the assessee was selected under scrutiny. First notice under section 143(3) of the Act was issued on 28-09-2018. In the compliance of the notice the assessee filed the reply. Again, notices on various dated issued to the assessee but no replied was filed by the assessee as per the requirement of the notice. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act after making the additions and assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.54,65,38,900/-. According to Assessing Officer the assessee has failed to provide the details of the creditors and Assessing Officer treated the creditors bogus add the amount in the income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also held that the assessee has not provided the bills of purchases in the name of Inderpal Singh, bank statement. 3.Aggrieved the order of the ld. AO the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. NFAC, who vide his order dated 09-03-2026 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that he has filed the additional evidences during the hearing of appeal on which remand report was called out but the same not submitted by the Assessing Officer and after rejected the application of the additional the appeal was dismissed. It is evident from the order of the Ld. NFAC that remand report was sought from the Assessing Officer but the AO has not furnished the same and appeal was decided as per the material available on record. Per contra the Ld. DR relied the orders of the lower authorities. He submitted that assessee has not furnished the submission before the lower authorities, the appeal was rightly rejected by the Ld. NFAC. 5. Since in the instant case the appeal was decided without admitted the additional evidences by the Ld. NFAC. The assessee also failed to file the documents before the Assessing Officer, therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also

directed to appear before the Ld. Assessing Officer and co- operate in the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court 24.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SR BHATNAGGAR Date: 24.08.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) ` 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →