PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 1 vs. M/S BUENO FOODS PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 118 / 2025HC Delhi25 April 20252 pages
For Petitioner: VIPUL AGRAWAL
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for determination of valuation using the correct method, which the ITAT had failed to direct.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order. The Revenue's counsel argued that the ITAT had not directed the Assessing Officer to determine valuation using the correct DCF method, as per previous High Court decisions. The appeal was filed with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred by not directing the Assessing Officer to determine the valuation using the correct DCF method, as per established High Court precedents.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 118/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 1 .....Appellant Through: Mr Vipul Aggarwal, SSC, Ms Sakshi Shairwal, and Mr Akshat Singh, JSCs and Mr Gaurang Ranjan, Advocate versus M/S BUENO FOODS PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 25.04.2025 CM APPL. 24215/2025(condn of delay in refiling) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 434 days in re- filing the above captioned appeal stands condoned. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 118/2025 3. Mr Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the issue involved in the present appeal is covered by the earlier decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 v. Caddie Hotels Pvt Limited: ITA No. 470/2024 decided on 02.09.2024 as well as the case of Agra Portfolio Pvt Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Another: (2024) 464 ITR 348. 4. However, Mr Aggarwal, the learned counsel for the Appellant states that in terms of the said decisions, the matters were remanded to the Assessing Officer [AO] for determination of the valuation by applying 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 13:13:03

correct method of valuation, that is, DCF, in the event, the AO was of the view that the valuation presented was erroneous. He submits that in the circumstances, the matter is required to be remanded to the AO, however, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has not passed any such directions. 5. Issue notice to the respondent through all permissible modes returnable, on 10.11.2025. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J APRIL 25, 2025 M 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 13:13:03

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →