PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. VERSATILE POLYTECH PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 526 / 2022HC Delhi13 December 20222 pages
For Petitioner: SANJAY KUMAR
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the Revenue's contention that the Tribunal's view was erroneous as the source of income, which was unexplained share capital/premium, did not change. The court listed the appeal for further hearing.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that ruled against them. The ITAT's decision was based on the addition made by invoking Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, a section not previously used by the assessing officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred in allowing an addition based on a section not invoked by the assessing officer, despite the source of income remaining the same.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(viib)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 526/2022

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2

..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr Standing Counsel.

versus

VERSATILE POLYTECH PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

13.12.2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM Appl.53803/2022 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM Appl.53804/2022 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 180 days in re-filing the appeal]

2.

Issue notice to the respondent/assessee via all permissible modes, including email. 2.1 List the application on 19.12.2022. ITA 526/2022 3. Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that the issue raised in the present appeal also obtains in another appeal concerning the same parties, i.e., ITA ITA 526/2022

1/2 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 13:32:47

371/2021. 3.1. We are told that the said appeal is listed before the court on 19.12.2022. 4. It appears that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”] via the impugned order dated 15.03.2019 has ruled against the appellant/revenue on the ground that addition has been made by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “Act”], which is a provision, not adverted to by the assessing officer in his order. 5. Mr Kumar says that the view of the Tribunal is erroneous, inasmuch as the source of the income did not change. The source of income in this case, according to the appellant/revenue, is induction of unexplained share capital/premium. 6. List the appeal on 19.12.2022.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

DECEMBER 13, 2022/pmc

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 526/2022

2/2

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 13:32:47

More judgments on Section 56(2)(viib)

All 746 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(viib) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →