AKM ASSOCIATES,UTTAR PRADESH V. ITO WARD - 2(3), UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 5530/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves AKM Associates, the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, which sustained the additions made by the AO for the Assessment Year 2022-23. The primary contention was the AO's estimation of the net profit at 2%, which the CIT(A) upheld without adjudicating on additional evidences provided by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had admitted the additional evidences but did not address them in the decision. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for a fresh examination of the additional evidences.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791023 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY KUMAR ARORA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV KUMAR JAIN
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5530/Del/2024 [Assessment Year: 2022-23] AKM Associates Mohalla Bhadwar Ganj Ujhani Budan 243631 Uttar Pradesh PAN No.ABVFA0039R Vs. ITO Ward- 2(3) Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, CA Revenue by Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.12.2025 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal filed by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [herein after referred as “CIT(A)”] dated 03.10.2024 for the A.Y. 2022-23 in sustaining the additions made by the AO. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that this is the first year of the business of the assessee and Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 the assessee since could not provide certain documents before the AO at the time of assessment, those documents were furnished before the Ld.CIT(A) as additional evidences which the ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate on additional evidences furnished by the assessee but sustained the net profit estimated by the AO @2% without adjudicating on the additional evidences furnished. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the AO to examine the additional evidences, to which the Ld. DR has no serious objection. 3. We have heard the rival arguments and perused the orders of the authorities below. Considering the submissions of the Assessee the additional evidences furnished before us and perusing the orders of the authorities below we find that though the assessee has furnished additional evidences in the course of appeal proceedings which the Ld. CIT(A) all though admitted the additional evidences and called for remand report from the AO and rejoinder from the assessee, did not deal with the additional evidences and simply sustained the estimation of net profit computed by the AO @ 2% without giving any findings on the additional evidences furnished by the assessee. 4. Therefore, taking the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration and the additional evidences furnished by the assessee, we restore the issue in appeal to the file of the AO who shall examine the evidences and decide the issue Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 afresh and in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.12.2025. Sd/- Sd/- /- [M. BALAGANESH] [C.N. PRASAD] ACCOUTNANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 12.12.2025 NEHA , Sr.P.S.* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "