+ W.p.(C) 4895/2025 & Cm Nos.22521/2025 v. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department

$~110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 4895/2025 & CM Nos.22521/2025 & 22522/2025SPRNG ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED.....PetitionerThrough:Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Anshul Sachar & Mr. Tavish Verma,Advs.SPRNG ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED.....PetitionerThrough:Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Anshul Sachar & Mr. Tavish Verma,Advs. VersusASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT .....RespondentThrough:Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, Adv. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R17.04.2025 % 1.Issue notice. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent accepts notice. 3.The petitioner [Assessee] has filed the present petition, inter alia,impugning an assessment order dated 25.03.2025 [impugned order] passedunder Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961[the Act]. The Assessee also impugns a notice of demand issued underSection 156 of the Act. 4.It is the Assessee’s case that the impugned order has been passed inviolation of the principle of natural justice. The Assessee had filed its returnof income for Assessment Year 2023-24 on 30.11.2023. The Assessee’sreturn was picked up for scrutiny and a notice dated 19.06.2024 was issuedunder Section 143(2) of the Act.It does not appear that any substantialproceedings were conducted immediately thereafter. However, on 13.03.2025,the AO issued a show cause notice calling upon the Assessee toexplain why the share capital amounting to ₹4,39,81,00,000/- not be included in the total income as unexplained credit under Section 68 of the Act. TheAssessee was called upon to reply to the said SCN within a period of four days, that is on or before 17.03.2025. Thereafter, the AO issued anothernotice dated 16.03.2025, in effect, reiterating the contents of the SCN issuedthree days earlier. The Assessee was now called upon to file a reply by19.03.2025. 5.The Assessee responded to the SCN by submitting voluminousdocuments on 17.03.2025. Thereafter, the Assessee also filed another replydated 19.03.2025 submitting further documents and also sought a personalhearing. Additionally, the Assessee also requested for further two/three days’time to collate the remaining documents considering that the informationrequired is voluminous. However, the AO passed the impugned order withoutgranting further opportunity to be heard. 6.The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue fairly submits that theimpugned order be set aside for the reasons stated in the petition and thematter be remanded to the AO for consideration afresh. 7.In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the impugnedorder is set aside. The matter is remanded to the AO to consider theAssessee’s response to the show cause notice and pass a fresh order afteraffording the Assessee an opportunity to be heard. The Assessee is also atliberty to file further documents in support of its contentions within a periodof one week from date. 8.The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending applications arealso disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J APRIL 17, 2025‘gsr’Click here to check corrigendum, if any