PLHR HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 32, DELHI

ITA 4571/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s PLHR Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 147 and 69(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-21. The additions included Rs. 20 lakhs as unexplained investment and Rs. 60,000 as commission expenditure. The CIT(Appeals) upheld the additions under general provisions, which the Tribunal found inappropriate, citing precedents that restrict changing the head of income under section 251(1)(a). The Tribunal's decision to delete the additions was based on the specific provisions of the Act, which did not support the additions made.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 771979 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Union Tyres (1990) 240 ITR 556 (Del.), CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Del.)(FB)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 4571/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4571/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/s PLHR Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Sector-6, PLHR Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Pushp Vihar, South Delhi-110017. PAN: AAKCP 3055 F Vs DCIT, Central circle-32, New Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Mayank Patawari, Adv. ShriAkash Ojha, Adv. Department represented by Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 28.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.08.2025 O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21 arises against CIT(Appeals)-30 New Delhi’s’ order dated 15.07.2025 [DIN: ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1078535160(1)] in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Coming to the solitary substantive issue between the parties herein, it transpires during the course of hearing that learned Assessing Officer framed his assessment in question on 30.03.2025, inter alia, adding the assessee’s payment of Rs. 20 lakhs made to M/s Syamali Security & Consultant Pvt. Ltd. as it’s unexplained investment and further added the alleged commission expenditure u/s Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 4571/Del/2025 69(3) @ 3%; coming to Rs. 60,000/-; respectively. It is further noticed that the learned CIT(A)’s detailed discussion although has accepted the assessee’s case that both the above statutory provisions do not apply herein, he has; however, affirmed the addition under the so called “general” provisions of the Act. 2.1 It is in this factual backdrop that the tribunal is of the considered view that impugned twin additions stand deleted under the specific provision; no alleged general provision would come to the Revenue’s aid as is done in the lower appellate discussion in issue. And also that going by CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC), CIT vs. Union Tyres (1990) 240 ITR 556 (Del.) and CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 (Del.)(FB), there is no such option of changing the head of income in section 251(1)(a) “enhancement” jurisdiction as well. The impugned twin additions of Rs. 20 lakh as well as Rs. 60,000/- herein, are hereby deleted, therefore. 3. This assessee’s appeal ITA 4571/Del/2025 is allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 28.08.2025. Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 28.08.2025. *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "