AVANN BUILDSYS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), KARNAL, HARYANA

ITA 5657/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Avann Buildsys Pvt Ltd., the appellant, contesting an addition of Rs. 12,75,000 to their income under section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, which pertains to the issuance of fresh equity shares. The initial assessment was completed accepting the returned income, but following a revision order under section 263 by the PCIT, the Assessing Officer made the addition after the assessee failed to respond satisfactorily to notices regarding share premium received. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the hearings conducted by both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), leading to the remittance of the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784887 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: DHRUV GOEL; THRU VC
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144; 143(3); 142(1); 263

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA No. 5657 /Del/2025 Asstt. Year : 2015-16 AVANN BUILDSYS PVT LTD., Vs. DCIT (CC), KARNAL, RESHAM HOUSE, FARM NO. 9/1, HARYANA AMALTAS AVENUE, WESTEND GREEN FARM SOCIETY, SAMALKHA, SOUTH WEST DELHI, NEW DELHI (PAN: AAACM4936G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Dhruv Goel, CA (Thru VC) Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.11.2025 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-3 , Gurgaon in Appeal No. 10152625/2014-15, order dated 26.8.2025, on the following grounds:- 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the additions of Rs. 12,75,000/- u/s. 56(2)(viib) on account of issuance of fresh equity shares during the year. 2. That the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of assesseee exparte without granting adequate opportunity of being heard to assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 2 | P a g e 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on25.11.2015 declaring an income at Rs. 20,12,760/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed on 18.09.2017 u/.s 143(3) of the Act accepting the returned income. Thereafter, the Ld. PCIT passed an order dated 19.02.2021 u/s. 263 giving direction for revision of assessment order. Pursuant to the directions of the PCIT, Assessing Officer observed that the assessee was issued notices u/s. 142(1) from time tome asking details with respect to share premium received. The assessee has not responded to the notices. A show cause notice u/s. 144 containing draft assessment order was sent to the assessee on 21.3.2022. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee made his submissions on 23.3.2022. On careful perusal and examination of the submissions, it was found untenable and not satisfactory. Hence, he disallowed an amount of Rs. 12,75,000/- and added back the same to the income of the assessee u/s. 56(2)(viib) of the Act vide order dated 30.3.2022 passed u/s. 144 r.w.s 263 read with section 144B of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi 26 who vide order dated 14.7.2025 has upheld the addition. Against the aforesaid, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. After hearing both the sides and perusing the records, I find that AO has passed the exparte order u/s 144 r.w.s 263 of the Act by observing that “on careful consideration and examination of the submissions, it was found untenable and not satisfactory”. Similarly, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee and passed the exparte order and even has not decided the matter on merit and upheld the action of the AO by passing a non-speaking order. Therefore, in view of the factual matrix, as Printed from counselvise.com 3 | P a g e aforesaid and in the interest of justice, I remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi to decide the same afresh, in accordance with law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to furnish all the requisite evidences during the proceedings to canvass its case properly and fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 5. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12.11.2025. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT Date : 12-11-2025 SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT By Order, Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench Printed from counselvise.com "