JCIT,(OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI V. SHRI RAM HARI RAM, DELHI

MA 59/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application by the Revenue seeking rectification of an order dated 13.11.2024 concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The Revenue argued that the case falls under Exception (h) of Para 3 of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024, which pertains to organized tax evasion through accommodation entries. The assessee, M/s. Shri Ram Hari Ram, was accused of engaging in organized tax evasion by obtaining bogus share capital and share premium entries. The Tribunal, referencing a decision by the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Bennet Coleman & CO. Ltd., held that the monetary limits prescribed in the CBDT Circulars apply to pending appeals and that exceptions to these limits apply only prospectively. Since the appeal in question was filed before the exception was introduced, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792460 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Bennet Coleman & CO. Ltd. [2025] 178 taxmann.com 255 (Bombay) [04.09.2025]
• Laws Referred To: Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, CBDT Circular No. 05/2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSARA
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK JAIN
• Keywords: Tax effect; Accommodation entries; Rectification of order; Bogus Share capital; Bogus

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.No.59/Del/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 944/Del/2021) Assessment Year: 2016-17 DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi PIN: 1100 55 Vs. M/s.Shri Ram Hari Ram, 1658-59, Dariba Kalan, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-1100 06 PAN AADFS7036D (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) read with Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 is for rectification of Order dated 13.11.2024 for assessment year 2016-17. Assessee by Shri Ashok Jain, CA Department by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansara, Sr. DR Date of hearing 28.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 05.12.2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.59/Del./2025 2. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue/ Applicant submitted that Hon’ble Tribunal, while passing order dated 13.11.2024 failed to consider that the case falls under Exception (h) of Para 3 of CBDT Circular No. 05/2024. The exception explicitly includes cases involving organized tax evasion through accommodation entries. In this case, the additions were based on credible evidence and investigation reports confirming that the assessee engaged in organized tax evasion by obtaining bogus share capital and share premium entries. Hence, the monetary threshold is not applicable to this case. So, order dated 03.11.2024 may be recalled and Revenue’s appeal be restored for adjudication on merits. 3. Learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in CIT vs. Bennet Coleman & CO. Ltd. [2025] 178 taxmann.com 255 (Bombay) [04.09.2025] in paras 4 & 5 has held as under: “4. As can be seen from this reproduction, this Court has time and again held that the monetary limits prescribed in the CBDT Circulars will apply to pending Appeals as well. In other words, for the purposes of the monetary limits, the Circular dated 17th September 2024 would apply to the present Appeal. However, this Court has also held that the exceptions carved out by the CBDT Circulars would apply only prospectively and would have no application, If they were introduced after the filing of the Appeal. Admittedly, in the present case, the Appeal was filed on 21st May 2015, while the exception the Revenue relies upon was introduced Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.59/Del./2025 vide Circular dated 15th March 2024. Hence, the exception relied upon by the Revenue in the Circular dated 15th March 2024 cannot be a justification for prosecuting the above Appeal that was filed on 21st May 2015. 5. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Appeal is accordingly disposed of because the tax effect is below the monetary limits as set out in the CBDT Circular dated 17th September 2024. However, there shall be no order as to cost.” 4. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it crystal clear that the Revenue has prayed for recall of order dated 13.11.2024 since the case falls under Exception (h) of para 3 of CBDT Circular No.2024 dated 15.03.2024 as well as restoration of Revenue’s appeal for adjudication on merits. 5. Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in CIT vs. Bennet Coleman & CO. Ltd. [2025] 178 taxmann.com 255 (Bombay) [04.09.2025] has held that monetary limit prescribed in CBDT Circular will apply to pending appeals. However, the exception carved out by the CBDT Circular would apply only prospectively after filing of appeal. 6. In present case, the appeal was filed on 06.08.2021. Therefore, exemption in Circular dated 15.03.2024 has no application. The miscellaneous application being de void of merits deserves dismissal. Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No.59/Del./2025 7. In the result, miscellaneous application filed by Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M BALAGANESH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (VIMAL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 05th December, 2025. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "