Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-7 v. Sun Infraestate Pvt. Ltd

$~13 & 19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +ITA 198/2025 and CM APPLs. 38485-87/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7.....AppellantThrough:Mr.PuneetRai,SSCwithMr.Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia,Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms.SrishtiSharmaandMr.PrathamAggarwal, Advocates.Through:Mr.PuneetRai,SSCwithMr.Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia,Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms.SrishtiSharmaandMr.PrathamAggarwal, Advocates. versus SUN INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through:Mr. Ved Jain, Mr. Nischay Kantoor,Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. SarthakAbrol, Advs.Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. SarthakAbrol, Advs. AND +ITA 194/2025 and CM APPL. 38218-19/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7.....AppellantThrough:Mr.PuneetRai,SSCwithMr.Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia,Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms.SrishtiSharmaandMr.PrathamAggarwal, Advocates.Through:Mr.PuneetRai,SSCwithMr.Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia,Mr. Gibran, Mr. Nikhil Jain, Ms.SrishtiSharmaandMr.PrathamAggarwal, Advocates. versus SUN INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD......Respondent Through:Mr. Ved Jain, Mr. Nischay Kantoor,Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. SarthakAbrol, Advs.Ms. Soniya Dodeja and Mr. SarthakAbrol, Advs. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R % 04.07.2025 1.The Revenue has filed the present appeals under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 [the Act], inter alia, impugning an order dated02.07.2024 [impugned order] passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of assessment years [AYs] 2016-17 and 2018-19. The said common order was passed by the learned ITAT in ITANo.1469/Del/2023 and ITA 1470/Del/2023. These appeals were preferredby the Revenue against the separate orders passed by the National FacelessAppeal Centre on 17.03.2023. 2.The principal question to be addressed in the present appeals relates toassessment orders passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre inrespect of amounts received by the respondent [Assessee] during theprevious year relevant to AYs 2016-17 and 2018-19 from one M/s GrandRealcon Pvt. Ltd. 3.The learned ITAT had faulted the assessment unit for making anaddition on the sole basis that the concerned entity [M/s Grand Realcon Pvt.Ltd.] had not responded to the summons under Section 133(6) of the Actwithout giving an opportunity to the respondent to produce the principalofficer of the said entity. 4.The learned counsel are ad idem that complete enquiries had not beenconducted. 5.After some arguments, the counsels further agree that the matter beremanded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for examining all the issuesand passing fresh assessment orders in accordance with law. This coursecommends itself to this court. Thus, without examining the merits of thedecision rendered by the ITAT, we consider it apposite to set aside theimpugned order passed by the ITAT; orders dated 17.03.2023 passed by theNFAC; the assessment order dated 29.03.2022 in respect of AY 2016-17,and the assessment order dated 21.09.2021 in respect of AY 2018-19, and,remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for consideration afresh. 6.This order is passed with the consent of the learned counsel for theparties.parties. 7.All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. 8.The appeals and all pending applications are disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J JULY 4, 2025RKClick here to check corrigendum, if any