INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14]

ITO, vs Sourabh Logistics Pvt.Ltd., Ward-24(1), H-4/5, Plot No.93, New Delhi Suvidha Kunj, Pitampura, New Delhi-110034. PAN-AAPCS4485B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Respondent by Shri Sarwar Raja, Adv., Shri Mohammad Zaid, Adv. & Shri Arnav Chakraborty, Adv.

Date of Hearing 23.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :

The captioned appeal is filed by Revenue against the order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 10.02.2023 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-8/10624/2016-17 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 30.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14.

2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee company filed its return of income on 17.09.2013, declaring total income at INR 4,83,770/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed on the basis of material available as the assessee has not filed complete details as sought from time to time and the addition of INR 6,15,34,820/- was made u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credits in the shape of share application money, unsecured loans and cash deposits in the bank accounts. Besides this, disallowance of unverifiable expenses to the extent of INR 2,90,787/- was also made and accordingly, total income of the assessee was assessed at INR 6,23,09,377/-.

3. Against this order, an appeal was filed by the assessee before Ld.CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 10.02.2023 has allowed part relief to the assessee wherein addition of INR 4.50 crores on account of share application money and INR 1.50 crores on account of unsecured loans were deleted by Ld. CIT(A).

4. Against the said order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of Rs. 4,50,00,000/- on account of share application money received by assessee but treated unexplained credit u/s 68 of the IT, Act by the AO, without going into the creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness transaction.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the IT Act, without appreciation of the finding of the AO as assessee failed to prove creditworthiness of the parties and genuineness of the transaction during assessment proceedings.

3. The appellant craves to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.”

5. Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Revenue is with respect to the addition of INR 4.50 crores made by AO and deleted by Ld.

CIT(A).

6. Before us, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue supports the order of AO and submits that during the year under appeal, assessee received total INR 9.50 crores as share application money out of which INR 4.50 crores were received from two individuals namely, Shri Ramesh Chander of INR 2,32,50,000/- and from Shri Mahender Pal Khanna of INR 2,17,50,000/-. He further submits that before AO, only confirmation and copy of acknowledgement of ITR of both of these parties were filed and neither their bank statements were filed with respect to establish their creditworthiness nor they have responded in compliance to notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act by the AO. Ld. Sr. DR submits that Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions since the assessee filed complete details including their bank statements as additional evidences. Ld. Sr. Dr submits that ld. CIT(A) erred in admitting the additional evidences filed by assessee by ignoring the fact that AO had provided sufficient opportunities but the assessee failed to file all such