PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL vs. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 568 / 2023HC Delhi09 October 20232 pages
For Petitioner: ZOHEB HOSSAIN
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection concerning the extension of the audit timeframe. The High Court noted that the issues in this appeal were similar to another pending appeal and adjourned the hearing.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that allowed the assessee's cross-objection regarding the extension of time for an audit under Section 142(2A). The AO had obtained approval for the initial audit appointment but sought fresh approval for an extension, which the assessee argued violated Section 142(2C).

What were the issues?

Whether the AO's re-seeking approval from the CIT for an extension of the audit period, after initial approval, violated the provisions of Section 142(2C) of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(2A),Section 142(2C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 568/2023

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjeev Menon, Standing Counsel.

versus

SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD

..... Respondent

Through: Mr Rohit Jain with Mr Aniket D.

Agrawal and Mr Abhishek, Singhvi,

Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

09.10.2023 Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

ITA 568/2023 & CM No. 51976/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 446 days in re-filing the appeal] 1. Mr Sanjeev Menon, learned standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that the issues that arise in the instant appeal also obtains in ITA No. 526/2023 and that the same is listed on 11.10.2023. 2. Accordingly, list the above-captioned appeal as well as the application on 11.10.2023. 3. We may note that this appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2008- 09. 4. Via, the instant appeal the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 03.06.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. ITA 568/2023

Page 1 of 2 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 14:25:27

5.

The Tribunal had allowed the cross-objection of the assessee regarding the extension of the timeframe granted by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the conduct of an audit under Section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short, “Act”]. 6. It is not in dispute that the AO had taken the approval of the specified authority i.e., Commissioner of Income Tax [in short, “CIT”] while appointing the auditor. 7. However, when an extension of time was sought by the auditor, on account of the respondent/assessee not cooperating, the AO, once again, sought the approval of the CIT. 8. According to the respondent/assessee, this violated the proviso appended to Section 142(2C) of the Act. 9. The respondent/assessee contends that an extension of the timeframe could have been ordered by the AO on his own i.e., suo motu, or on an application moved by the respondent/assessee, albeit, for any good and sufficient reason. 10. This aspect of the matter will be examined on the next date of hearing. 11. List the matter on 11.10.2023. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J OCTOBER 9, 2023/RY

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 568/2023

Page 2 of 2

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 14:25:27

More judgments on Section 142(2A)

All 676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(2A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →