INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI V. ASTHA FINVEST LTD., DELHI

MA 273/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had dismissed the Revenue's appeal concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The Revenue contended that the ITAT had relied on an incorrect remand report in their previous decision, which led to the dismissal of their appeal. The remand report in question was supposed to confirm the absence of any additions required in the assessment, which was crucial for the ITAT's decision. However, the Revenue argued that the remand report considered by the ITAT was different from the one actually submitted by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the material on record, concluded that there was no mistake apparent on record and dismissed the miscellaneous application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780247 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV JAIN

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘A’ : NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No.273/DEL/2025 (in ITA No.4713/DEL/2024) (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer, vs. Astha Finvest Limited, Bhiwani (Haryana). 14, 1st Floor, K.M. Market, Railway Road, Clock Tower, Bhiwani – 127 021 (Haryana). (PAN : AAACA6184A) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT/REVENUE BY : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rajiv Jain, CA Date of Hearing : 12.09.2025 Date of Order : 06.10.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This misc. application is filed by the Applicant/Revenue against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.4713/Del/2024 dated 21.03.2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19 for recalling/amending the impugned order dated 21.03.2025. 2. This misc. application is filed by the Revenue with the request that the ITAT has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue with the finding that in the remand report, the AO has accepted the fact that no addition was actually Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.273/Del/2025 called for. The relief has been granted by the ld. CIT (A) placing reliance on the remand report as well as on his own analysis of the matter. The case of the Revenue, therefore, fails as the relief is resting upon the remand report of the AO. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) was sustained and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. However, it is brought to our attention that the relevant para no.9 of the remand report dated 19.07.2024 and the relevant para was reproduced at page 2 of the misc. application. It was pleaded that the remand report reproduced in the order of ld. CIT (A) at para 9 of the remand report and para 9 of the remand report dated 19.07.2024 received from the AO are different. The ITAT had relied on the remand report reproduced by the ld. CIT (A) and decided the issue against the Revenue. It was pleaded that in para 9 of the remand report dated 19.07.2024, the AO has not made any comments regarding satisfaction of creditworthiness and genuineness of the share capital transactions. In view of the above, it was pleaded that comments of the AO in the remand report dated 19.07.2024 may be considered for the purpose of adjudication and prayed that the same may be recalled. 3. On the other hand, ld. AR of the assessee pleaded that there is no mistake apparent on record considering the fact that ITAT has relied on the findings of the first appellate authority and the remand report as brought Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.273/Del/2025 to their notice, therefore, there is no mistake apparent on record requiring the entertainment of the misc. application filed by the assessee. 4. Considered the submissions of both the parties and material placed on record. We observe that the remand report which was claimed to be wrong was considered by the ld. CIT (A) and based on that ld. CIT (A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and there is no record brought on record before us to show that at the time of hearing, the correct remand report was brought to the notice of the coordinate Bench, therefore, we do not see any mistake apparent on record. Accordingly, we do not see any scope under section 254(2) of the Act to review the above order and the issues raised by the Revenue in the misc. application. Therefore, we are inclined to dismiss the misc. application. 5. In the result, the misc. application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 6th day of October, 2025. Sd/- sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 06.10.2025 TS Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No.273/Del/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "