High Court Holds No Further Assessment Proceedings Warranted After Earlier Appeal Dismissal:

High Court Holds No Further Assessment Proceedings Warranted After Earlier Appeal Dismissal

The Delhi High Court clarifies that its earlier order did not remand the case to the AO and concludes the dispute.

High Court Dismisses Quartz Commercial’s Appeal

authorSaimadateOct 25, 2026
Last update on Oct 24, 2026

The assessee had filed its return of income on November 14, 2007, declaring a loss of Rs 2,064. During scrutiny, the AO observed that the assessee had received substantial share application money along with a significant share premium and had transferred the funds to other companies as share application money on the same date. Considering the transactions to be indicative of accommodation entry operations, the AO estimated commission income at 0.5% of the total transactions and made an addition of Rs 7.87 lakh.

CBI Court in Ghaziabad Sentences Former Sub Post Master to Three Years in Jail for Misappropriating Rs 15.27 Lakh in Postal Funds

The assessee challenged the addition before the CIT(A), which initially dismissed the appeal. Subsequently, the Tribunal, by an order dated March 1, 2013, remanded the matter to the AO with a direction to examine the assessee’s books of account and record a finding. After examining the books, the AO again sustained the addition through an assessment order dated February 13, 2014. The CIT(A) upheld the addition on November 7, 2016, and the Tribunal dismissed the assessee’s subsequent appeal on July 31, 2017.

ITAT Remands Rs 2.20 Crore Addition Under Section 69C for Fresh Examination

Thereafter, the assessee approached the Delhi High Court. By an order dated February 9, 2018, the High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that no substantial question of law arose in view of the concurrent findings of the lower authorities. However, the assessee subsequently approached the AO again, believing that the High Court had remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

ITAT Deletes Section 43 Penalty for Non-Disclosure of Foreign Assets in Schedule FA

The High Court clarified that its order dated February 9, 2018, had not remanded the matter to the AO. Accordingly, the Delhi High Court held that the present appeal was misconceived and dismissed it, disposing of all pending applications as well.

About Author

LinkedIn

Saima

Content Writer

Saima is a Law graduate with a passion for research and content writing. She writes for Finance, Taxation and Legal Updates at Studycafe.in, simplifying complex legal decisions by the ITAT, High Court, AAR and GSTAT into uncomplicated and clear explanations.
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
577
Up Next

Loading suggestions…