Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against the CIT(A)'s order upholding additions made under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The additions pertained to alleged inflated expenses. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.
Held
The Tribunal found no reason to accept either party's stand entirely, as the additions were based on an alleged inflated rate of expenditure. A lumpsum addition of Rs.1 lakh (Rs.50,000/- each instance) was deemed appropriate, with a rider that it should not be treated as a precedent.
Key Issues
Whether the additions made by the lower authorities on account of alleged inflated expenses were justified? What should be the quantum of addition in the given facts and circumstances?
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Date of hearing 24.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.11.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2023-24, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s-23 DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1078857122(1), dated 24.07.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Learned departmental representative vehemently submits during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities herein