IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [DELHIBENCH:“A” New Delhi]

BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 4651/Del/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2017-18)

RBA Buildtech Private limited Vs DCIT/ACIT A-66, Sector 63, Noida, Central Circle-1, 2^nd floor, Uttar Pradesh ARTO Complex, Ssector-

PAN: AAGCR928SF 33, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent I.T.A. No. 4472/Del/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2017-18)

DCIT/ACIT Vs RBA Buildtech Private Central Circle-1, limited,A-66, Sector 63, 2nd Floor, ARTO Complex, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Sector-33 Noida, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AAGCR928SF Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv& Sh.

VirsainAdarwal, ITP Revenue by Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 13/08/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee and the Revenue challenging the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 Noida (‘Ld. CIT(A for short), dated 29/07/2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 declaring total income at Rs.5,52,45,420/-. Regular assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was finalized vide order dated 31.12.2019 accepting the total income Rs. 5,52,45,420/- declared by the assessee. Thereafter, it was found from the information in possession with the department that the assessee RBA Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. entered into LLP in the name and style of M/s AR Landcraft LLP and there were various high value transactions. Accordingly, after recording the reason for reopening, a notice u/s 148 of the Act has been issued on 31.03.2021. Thereafter, vide letter dated 26.10.2021, the assessee was requested to make compliance in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee vide reply dated nil received by the A.O. on 25.11.2021, requested the A.O. to treat the original return of income filed as return filed in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. Assessment order came to be passed on 26/03/2022 u/s 147 of the Act by making an addition of Rs. 21.55 Crore u/s 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loan from Rudra Buildwell Homes Pvt. Ltd. and Sky Blue Industries Pvt. Ltd. as the assessee failed to furnish complete details/information.

3. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 26/03/2022, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT (A) vide order dated 29/07/2024, deleted the addition of Rs. 10 crore made u/s 68 of the Act received from Rudra Buildwell Homes Pvt. Ltd. and confirmed the addition of Rs. 11.55 Crore received from Sky Blue Industries Pvt. Ltd. Aggrieved by the deletion of the said addition the Department of Revenue preferred the Appeal in ITA No. 4472/Del/2024 and as against the confirmation of the addition, the Assessee preferred an Appeal in ITA No. 4651/Del/2024.

4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee addressing on the Ground No.3 of the Assessee, vehemently submitted that the assessment framed u/s 147 is bad in law as the same has been framed on the basis of notice issued u/s 148 (un-amended) of the Act dated 31/03/2021 which was served on the Assessee’s email on 20/04/2021. That the A.O. erred in serving the notice u/s 148 of the Act (un-amended) on 20/04/2021 on which date the old provision of section 148 of the Act was substituted with the new provisions, thus the A.O. issued notice without following the applicable provision of Section 148, 148 and 149 of the Act. Thus, submitted that the assessment order itself become void-ab-initio which was framed based on the defective service of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The Ld. Counsel has also relied on plethora of Judgment in support of his contentions.

5. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31/03/2021 and as on that date the old provision of law was applicable, therefore, the A.O. committed no error in issuing th