SHUB CONDUCTORS LLP,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIR-7 DELHI, DELHI
ITA No.4553/Del/2025
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT
AND SHRISANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4553/Del/2025
िनधा रणवष /Assessment Year: 2022-23
M/S SHUB CONDUCTORS LLP
Plot No.1107, Sector-17,
Faridabad, NIT H.O.,
Faridabad, Haryana.
PAN No.ACUFS9783Q
बनाम
Vs.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
Central Circle-7,
Delhi.
अपीलाथ Appellant
यथ/Respondent
Assessee by Shri Anurag Gupta, CA
Revenue by Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR
सुनवाईकतारीख/ Date of hearing:
18.12.2025
उोषणाकतारीख/Pronouncement on 18.12.2025
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
1. This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereafter as “the Act”), dated 06.01.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-24, New
Delhi. In this case it is a matter of record that the assessee could not present the facts and evidences as required at the Ld. AO’s stage (para 4
at page 2 of the Ld. AO’s order), even though he did make some compliance to the terms of notices issued by the Ld. AO but that was not considered adequate and hence, he suffered the impugned additions.
1.1
The assessee carried this matter before the Ld. CIT(A), where in respect of two opportunities given by the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee did not 2
make any submission of facts, in fact he did not respond at all (para 3 at page 2 and para 4.1.1 at page 3 of the impugned order). Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) is seen to have also dismissed the appeal.
1.2
The assessee has approached the ITAT with grounds which protest the denial of opportunity, and the additions made on merit.
2. Before us the Ld. AR argued that substantial additions were made on third party evidences and have been made without adequate opportunity being provided to the assessee. It was the submission that the Ld. CIT(A) gave only two opportunities, that too within the span of a fortnight and thereafter, passed an adverse order. The Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity to present the facts before the Ld. CIT(A).
2.1
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. We have perused the orders of authorities below and have gone through the detailed paper book filed by the assessee. We have also heard the Ld.
AR/DR. It is clear that this is a facts based case and thus inadequacy of fact finding at lower levels hampers us from adjudicating in this matter.
Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee may submit any kind of evidence in his favour, even under Rule 46A, and the Ld. CIT(A) would examine the same and call for a remand report from the Ld. AO, if required.
3. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
3
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.12.2025 (MAHAVIR SINGH)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 29.12.2025
*Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.