IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3573/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs Mam Raj ChuNni Lal Exim Ward- 46 (1) Shop No. 5183, Ground New Delhi Floor, Lahori Gate, Naya Bazar, Delhi -110006 PAN No.AAXFM0533B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Cross Objection No. 45/Del/2025 (In ITA No.3573/Del/2024) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mam Raj Chunni Lal Exim Shop Vs Income Tax Officer, No. 5183, Ground Floor, Lahori Ward- 46 (1)

Gate, Naya Bazar, Delhi -110006 New Delhi PAN No.AAXFM0533B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Department by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advocate Sh. Saksham Agarwal, CA Sh. Deepesh Garg, Advocate Date of hearing: 04/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 12/12/2025

ORDER

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:

This appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the assessee are directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”], vide order dated 11.07.2024 pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17 arising out the assessment order dated 26-05-2023 under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act,1961, (in short ‘the Act’).

2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal :-

1. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred by ignoring that the Instruction No.1/2022 dated 11/05/2022 was issued by CBDT in compliance of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 04/05/2022 in the case of Union of India vs Ashish Aggarwal, for implementation of said judgement in uniform manner after considering the time extension provided by taxation and Other Law (Relaxation and amendment of certain provisions) Act 2020 and the case of the assessee falls under the ambit of para 6.2(ii) this instruction No. I and therefore prior approval in this case for order u/s 148A(d) of the Act & Notice u/s 148 of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17 (both dated 19/07/2022) has rightly been taken from the specified authority as per clause (i) of Section 151 of the Income Tax Act i.e. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-10, New Delhi.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the notices issued u/s 148 by the JAO are as per automated allocation and risk management strategies and therefore, in alignment with the provisions of Section 151A r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the both JAO as well as units under NFAC have concurrent jurisdiction under the Income-tax Act 1961, which has also recently been held by Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in its order in WP No WPO/1566/2023 dt. 13.09.2023.

3. That on facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld.

CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the facts.

Cross Objection No. 45/Del/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 The assessee raised the following grounds in cross objection:

(i) That Approval u/s 151 has been taken by Ld. AO from Ld. PCIT instead of Pr. CCIT.

(ii) That the impugned reassessment could not be done after the expiry of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year in view of the provisions of section 149(1) (b) which requires that after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, a case can be reopened only if income is represent by the Asset.

(iii) That other mandatory and statutory conditions of section 147 to 151 A have not been complied with.

(2) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the impugned addition of Rs.144,15,042/- on merit also made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus purchase by treating the same as unexplained expenditure.

(3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the impugned addition of Rs.44,66,376/- on merit also made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus sale by treating the same as unexplained credits.

(4) That the cross objection craves the leave to add, amend, modify delete any of the ground(s) of cross objection before or at the time of hearing