Case LawHigh Court › Pro Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, New De...

Pro Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, New Delhi v. New Video Pvt. Ltd

High Court 05 Sep 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Pro Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, New Delhi v. New Video Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
05 Sep 2017
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Pro Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, New Delhi v. New Video Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The question sought to be urged in the present appeals is whether the IT AT was justified in confinning the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'] which deleted the addition of Rs.21,64,518/-under Section 68 of the Act only on the ground that the payments to the creditors have...

Decision: The appeals and pending application are dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

• ! $--5 & 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 576/2017 PRo COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Advocate . versus NEW VIDEO PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: None. + ITA No. 577/2017 & C.M. No. 26810/2017 PRo COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Advocate. versus NEW VIDEO PVT. LTD. Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER 05.09.2017 0/0 1. The Revenue is in appeal against the order dated 16[th ]December 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (IT AT) in ITA No. 2587IDe1l2011 and ITA No.29561Del/2011 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2007-08 CAY'). ITA Nos. 576 & 57711017 Page Nos. 1 of1 Signature Not Verified • 2. The question sought to be urged in the present appeals is whether the IT AT was justified in confinning the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'] which deleted the addition of Rs.21,64,518/-under Section 68 of the Act only on the ground that the payments to the creditors have been made by the Assessee in the subsequent years. 3. The fact remains that the explanation offered by the Assessee regarding repayment to the creditors in subsequent years was accepted by the Revenue. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Court is not inclined to examine the question as urged. Nevertheless, the question is left open for consideration in an appropriate case. 4. The appeals and pending application are dismissed. S. MURALIDHAR, J. S. MURALIDHAR, .. PRATHIBAM. SINGH,J. SEPTEMBER 05, 2017 srb ITA Nos. 576 & 57712017
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan