DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. SHALIMAR CORP. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3068/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 April 2026AY 2017-1818 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition related to an advance from Nihon Impex Pvt Ltd was justified based on the evidence and the assessment of Nihon Impex. The Tribunal also addressed other additions made by the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a real estate developer, had cash deposits in its bank account post-demonetization. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated a portion of these deposits and other advances/loans as unexplained income under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits and advances/loans received by the assessee were unexplained income under Section 68, and whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting certain additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 153A,Section 133(6),Section 194IA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Rajani, CIT-DR
Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 09.04.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 2769/DEL/2022
ITA No. 3068/DEL/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER BENCH: The above captioned two cross appeals by the assessee and the Revenue are preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) - 31, New Delhi dated 26.09.2022 pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 respectively. Shalimar Corp [A.Y. 2017-18)

2.

Since the underlying appeals were heard together and the facts in issues are identical, both these appeals are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The assessee has raised the

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →