PARK VIEW AUTOMOTIVE P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-19(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 1159/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 October 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the tax authorities reached their conclusion merely on presumptions, without sufficient evidence to support the valuation of stocks at a higher price than actually transacted. The grounds of appeal were sustained.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased and sold shares of PPSL. The AO reopened the case based on an Investigation Wing report alleging a modus operandi involving shell companies and layering of funds. An addition was made to the assessee's income based on the difference between the sale price of shares to one party and the price at which shares were sold to another.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was vitiated and if the addition made by the AO on account of alleged undervaluation of shares was justified without proper evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 133(6),Section 50CA,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: F : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &, Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.07.2025Pronounced: 15.10.2025

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.11.2017 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-38, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’ for short) in Appeals No.94/2017-18 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 30.03.2016 passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-19(3), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that in regard to the assessee’s return which was processed u/s 143(1), on the basis of the report received from Investig

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →