VISHWAKARMA ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

ITA 3082/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vishwakarma Enterprises India P. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer, which was based on alleged cash deposits from unverifiable sources and underreported receipts. The appellant faced procedural difficulties in both the initial assessment and the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) due to the death of the company's director and other technical issues. The Tribunal found that the appellant was not given a fair opportunity to present their case and thus decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782136 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHA GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHYAM SUNDER MANGLA; CHARTERED
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.3082/िदʟी/2025 (िन.व. 2012-13) ITA No.3082/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2012-13) Vishwakarma Enterprises India P. Ltd., E-136 Basement, Kalkaji, Delhi 110019 ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant PAN: AADCV-7136-J बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(4), R. No.194A, CR Building, New Delhi 110019 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/Appellant by : Shri Shyam Sunder Mangla, Chartered Accountant, (Through VC) ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr.DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 27/10/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 19.12.2024, for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The appeal is time barred by 69 days. The assessee has filed an application citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, the delay has been caused for the reasons stated in petition which appears to be bonafide. Thus, delay of 69 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.3082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) 3. Shri Shyam Sunder Mangla, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 29.03.2019 was issued to the assessee on the basis of information received by the Assessing Officer (AO) that there were cash deposits of Rs.2,76,00,000/- from unverifiable sources in bank account of the assessee and the assessee has under reported receipts of Rs.1,41,322/-. The assessee could not participate in the assessment proceedings or respond to the notices issued by the AO as at that time the assessee was involved in various technical issues. However, the assessee vide communication dated 18.12.2019 requested to treat original return of income filed u/s.139 of the Act as return of income in response to the notice u/s.148 of the Act. The AO without considering the submissions of the assessee framed assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act estimating GP @8%on total credits in the bank account amounting to Rs.3,25,66,150/- and also made addition of Rs.1,80,137/- under the head income from other sources. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 26.12.2019, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). Even before the CIT(A), the matter could not be represented properly as the director of the company Shri Ram Kumar Dhiman who was looking after affairs of the assessee company had died on 17.04.2024. No one else in the company was well aware of the business and the facts. The ld. Counsel for the assessee thus, prayed for an opportunity to present the facts before the AO and explain source of cash deposits in the bank account. 4. Per contra, Ms. Sudha Gupta representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.3082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) 5. Both sides heard. Considering the fact that the case of the assessee could not represented before the AO or the CIT(A) properly, in the interest of justice I deem it appropriate to restore this matter back to the AO for fresh assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law. 6. The assessee shall respond notice(s) served by the Assessing Officer, without fail. 7. In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 27th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 27/10/2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.3082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "