THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 NEW DELHI vs. NEHA JEWELLERS PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 129 / 2025HC Delhi01 May 20252 pages
For Petitioner: SHLOK CHANDRA
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has not returned a specific finding in respect of Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. The Court acknowledged the appellant's contention that the facts for AY 2013-14 are materially different, as the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) possessed relevant material to determine that the purchases made by the assessee were bogus. The Court has issued notice to the respondent, making the appeal returnable on 17.11.2025. No decision on the merits of the case has been made at this stage. The operative direction is to issue notice.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi (Appellant) against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is Neha Jewellers Pvt Ltd. The appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14, and there is a mention of AY 2010-11. The appellant contends that the ITAT has not returned a specific finding for AY 2010-11. The appellant's primary argument is that the facts for AY 2013-14 are materially different, as the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) had relevant material to conclude that the purchases made by the assessee were bogus in AY 2013-14. The High Court has issued notice, returnable on 17.11.2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has returned a specific finding in respect of Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11, which is necessary for arriving at a conclusion for AY 2013-14? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (Neha Jewellers Pvt Ltd). Revenue's Contention: The learned Tribunal has not returned any specific finding in respect of AY 2010-11 for arriving at the conclusion in respect of AY 2013-14. The facts obtaining in AY 2013-14 are materially different, as in the present year, the relevant material was available with the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) to conclude that the purchases made by the Assessee were bogus.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~67 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 129/2025

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 NEW DELHI

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Naincy Jain, Jr.SC, Ms. Madhavi Shukla, Jr.SC & Mr. Ujjwal Jain, Advocate.

Versus

NEHA JEWELLERS PVT LTD

.....Respondent

Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

O R D E R %

01.05.2025 CM APPL. 26157/2025 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 129/2025, CM APPL.26155/2025, CM APPL. 26156/2025 3. Issue notice, returnable on 17.11.2025. 4. It is seen that the learned Tribunal has not returned any specific finding in respect of the Assessment Year [AY] 2010-11 for arriving at the conclusion in respect of AY 2013-14. It is contended that the facts as obtaining in AY 2013-14 are materially different, as in the present year the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:11:50

relevant material was available with the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) to conclude that the purchases made by the Assessee were bogus.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

TEJAS KARIA, J MAY 1, 2025/ ‘A’

Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:11:50

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →