$ 16 * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 27.11.2017 + ITA 54/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 1 Appellant Through : Mr Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. versus ADITYA KHANNA Respondent Through : Mr B.N.Goswamy, Advocate. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT) 1. Revenue s grievance in this case is that its appeal is rejected by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on ground that tax effect is lower than stipulated amount in terms of prevailing Circular. assessments involving similar questions were remitted for fresh consideration to Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in case of other parties, i.e. Mr Arvind Khanna and Mr Navin Khanna. 2. Revenue urges that sum of Rs.33,51,269/-, in facts and circumstances of this case, has to be added under Section 68 of Income Tax Act (hereafter referred to as Act ). ITA 54/2017 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel relies upon notice issued under Section 148 of Act contending that Revenue had received information from Enforcement Directorate with respect to possible disallowance under Section 68. 4. Assessee, who is represented by counsel, urges that respondent is non-resident and amounts were remitted by one M/s. Newheaven Nominees Limited. 5. It is contended that original assessment was completed after filing of Return, when net income was declared as Rs.98,850/-. Soon thereafter, proceedings under Section 148 were initiated culminating by substantial acceptance of Assessee s arguments and not resulting in any noticeable addition by order dated 31.12.2007. Assessee has produced copy of that Assessment Order. It refers to letter of Directorate of Enforcement dated 28.03.2006, mentioning about some transactions by Assessee. Revenue appears to have issued fresh notice under Section 148 on 23.02.2012 and recounted virtually same facts. 6. In this case, Assessing Officer (A.O.) appears to have completely ignored earlier re-assessment order framed under Section 148/143(3) on 31.12.2007. first re-assessment order noticed all relevant facts and accepted net income at Rs.1,03,890/- . assessment made in course of assessment proceeding, in present case, does not refer to any subsequent ITA 54/2017 Page 2 of 3 material other than Directorate of Enforcement s letter of 28.03.2006; instead A.O. appears to have just made Chart as basis even while acknowledging that earlier re-assessment proceedings were concluded on 31.12.2007, clearly stated that perusal in assessment records reveals that remittances received are not considered in return of income filed by Assessee and in course of assessment proceedings for Assessment Years 2003-2004 & 2006-2007 . That clearly shows that A.O. ignored that material, which led Revenue to re-open Assessment, in first instance, was same that he sought to resuscitate in order to make substantial additions. 7. Having regard to these facts, Court is of opinion that no substantial question of law arises. 8. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) SANJEEV SACHDEVA (JUDGE) NOVEMBER 27, 2017 Sn ITA 54/2017 Page 3 of 3 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) 1 v. Aditya Khanna