PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7 vs. SUN INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/198/2025HC DelhiDLHC01039684202504 July 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court agreed with the counsels that complete inquiries were not conducted. Consequently, the court set aside the ITAT order and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order concerning additions made to the assessee's income. The additions were based on a third-party entity not responding to a summons, without giving the assessee an opportunity to produce the entity's principal officer.

What were the issues?

Whether additions to income are valid when made solely on the non-response of a third party without providing the assessee an opportunity to produce relevant evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133(6),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~13 & 19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 198/2025 and CM APPLs. 38485-87/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7.....Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia, Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms. Srishti Sharma and Mr. Pratham Aggarwal, Advocates. versus SUN INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ved Jain, Mr. Nischay Kantoor, Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. Sarthak Abrol, Advs. AND + ITA 194/2025 and CM APPL. 38218-19/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7.....Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia, Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms. Srishti Sharma and Mr. Pratham Aggarwal, Advocates. versus SUN INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ved Jain, Mr. Nischay Kantoor, Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. Sarthak Abrol, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 04.07.2025 1. The Revenue has filed the present appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act], inter alia, impugning an order dated 02.07.2024 [impugned order] passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate 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 16/07/2025 at 12:37:53

Tribunal [ITAT] in respect of assessment years [AYs] 2016-17 and 2018- 19. The said common order was passed by the learned ITAT in ITA No.1469/Del/2023 and ITA 1470/Del/2023. These appeals were preferred by the Revenue against the separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC] on 17.03.2023. 2. The principal question to be addressed in the present appeals relates to assessment orders passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre in respect of amounts received by the respondent [Assessee] during the previous year relevant to AYs 2016-17 and 2018-19 from one M/s Grand Realcon Pvt. Ltd. 3. The learned ITAT had faulted the assessment unit for making an addition on the sole basis that the concerned entity [M/s Grand Realcon Pvt. Ltd.] had not responded to the summons under Section 133(6) of the Act without giving an opportunity to the respondent to produce the principal officer of the said entity. 4. The learned counsel are ad idem that complete enquiries had not been conducted. 5. After some arguments, the counsels further agree that the matter be remanded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for examining all the issues and passing fresh assessment orders in accordance with law. This course commends itself to this court. Thus, without examining the merits of the decision rendered by the ITAT, we consider it apposite to set aside the impugned order passed by the ITAT; orders dated 17.03.2023 passed by the NFAC; the assessment order dated 29.03.2022 in respect of AY 2016-17, and the assessment order dated 21.09.2021 in respect of AY 2018-19, and, remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for consideration afresh. 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 16/07/2025 at 12:37:53

6.

This order is passed with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. 8. The appeals and all pending applications are disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J JULY 4, 2025 RK 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 16/07/2025 at 12:37:53

More judgments on Section 133(6)

All 7,227 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133(6) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →