Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 136/2023 & CM Nos.11139-40/2023
PCIT-7, DELHI
..... Appellant Through: Mr Sunil Agarwal, Sr Standing Counsel with Mr Shivansh B. Pandya, Jr Standing Counsel and Mr Utkarsh Tiwari, Adv.
versus
M/S SANJIVANI INDUSTRIES PVT LTD ......Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R %
07.03.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No.11140/2023 1. Allowed, subject to the appellant filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing. ITA 136/2023 & CM No.11139/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal] 2. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2009-2010. 3. The appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 31.05.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. 4. The core issue which arises for consideration is: whether the addition made under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “Act”] should be sustained, as it is based on a statement made by, one, Mr Mul Chand Malu under Section 132(4) of the Act. ITA 136/2023
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 13:33:19
The respondent/assessee‟s stand is, that Mr Mul Chand Malu was neither its promoter nor director. The respondent/assessee seems to assert, that Mr Mul Chand Malu had no connection with it. 6. The Tribunal via the impugned judgment has ruled in favour of the respondent/assessee, on the ground that the addition under Section 68 of the Act concerning money received by way of share application and share premium cannot be made solely based on a statement made by Mr Mul Chand Malu under Section 132(4) of the Act. 6.1 In this context, reference has been made to the judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court rendered in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 82. 7. Mr Sunil Agarwal, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that a connected matter, i.e., ITA No.143/2022, titled Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central 3 v. Kuber Khadyan Pvt Ltd. is listed before the Court on 19.07.2023. 8. Issue notice to the respondent/assessee via all modes, including e- mail. 9. List the matter on the same date i.e., 19.07.2023.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
MARCH 7, 2023
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
ITA 136/2023
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 13:33:19