INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), JAIPUR vs. KIRAN INFRA ISPAT LIMITED, JAIPUR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
MkWa- ,e- ,y- ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ,oa MkWa- ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: DR. M.L. MEENA, AM & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 535/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1(1),
F-47 to 949, E-292, Road, No.
14 V.K.I. Area, Sikar Road,
Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAECK0903F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A.
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 15/07/2025
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 15/09/2025
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.
The present appeal by revenue for Assessment Year 2013-14 arise out of the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short
‘CIT(A)’] dated 04.02.2025 in the matter of assessment order dated
23.05.2023 passed u/s147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act 1961 [for short ‘Act’] by National Faceless Assessment Centre [for short ‘AO’] .
2. Vide this appeal, revenue has raised the following grounds:-
“1. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances and in law, of the case the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- made by the Kiran Infra Ispat Ltd., jaipur.
2
AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act as the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the transaction was not proved?
2. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act without waiting /
receiving of remand report from JAO?
3. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act without verifying the veracity of transaction or creditworthiness of the transactions with Mamta
Trading company while remand proceeding, the credit worthiness of the above party was not proved?
4. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act without properly considering the remand report and various facts finding during the assessment proceedings?
5. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- disallowed of bogus sale.”
Record reveals that in this case, the respondent assessee has raised legal grounds in terms of rule 27 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 alongwith a request to admit the same. Legal ground raised is reproduced below:- “1. On facts and in the circumstances of the case ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in re-opening the assessment u/s 148 of the Act arbitrarily.
1 That, the ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in re- opening the assessment u/s 148 of the Act as reassessment proceedings is initiated vide notice u/s 148 dated 12/05/2021 and same is barred by limitation as the notice under old law could have been validly issued on or before 31/03/2020 (i.e. not beyond 6 years). It is thus prayed that reassessment proceedings completed on the basis of notice issued u/s 148 is beyond the time limit stipulated u/s 149, is not in accordance with law and consequent order passed deserves to be held void ab initio. Kiran Infra Ispat Ltd., jaipur. 3 1.2 That, the ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the proceedings u/s 148 as valid when the notice issued is itself bad in law and suffers from various defects. Hence the order so passed deserves to be held bad in law.”
All the grounds of appeal taken by the revenue involve single issue of addition of Rs. 8,34,73,192/- so deleted by ld. CIT(A) and accordingly these are discussed together. 5. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Company incorporated on 15/09/2010 under The Companies Act, 1956 as closely held Public Limited Company with the