Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 03 ITAT CK 3625

M/s. PHI Seeds Pvt. Ltd. vs Addl. CIT

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'F', New Delhi · Decided on 2 March 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member · Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA Nos.1737/Del/2016 & 9671/Del/2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 359 words

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA No.1737/Del/2016 and 9671/Del/2019 for assessment years 2011-12 and 2016-17, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s orders dated 15.02.2016 and 23.10.2019 passed in case nos. 246/CIT(A)-7/Del/15-16 and CIT(A), Delhi-38/10005/2019-20, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

2.

We notice at the outset from a combined perusal of the case records that the assessee/appellant herein has filed its Form No. 8 i.e. a declaration under section 158A(1) of the Act, on the previous hearing dated 15th January, 2016, reading as under:

Exhibit reproduced from the original judgment
3.

That being the case, the earlier learned coordinate bench had directed the Revenue/Assessing Officer to file his report which has not been submitted till date. Be that as it may, we make it clear that there is no dispute between the parties even going by the learned lower authorities’ respective findings that the issue of assessee’s entitlement for claiming section 10(1) agricultural income exemption has gone against it in the said preceding assessment years.

4.

Learned counsel at this stage further seeks to buttress the point that the assessee’s latter appeal ITA No.9671/Del/2019 also raises a yet another issue of section 40(a)(ia) disallowance made by both the lower authorities.

5.

Faced with this situation and in light of the fact that the assessee’s main substantive grievance of claiming section 10(1) exemption is being restored back to the learned assessing authority under section 158A of the Act, we hereby treat section 40(a)(ia) disallowance as consequential in nature at this stage. We further wish to make it clear that the assessee has filed its documentary evidence(s) of having credited/deposited the corresponding TDS on or before the prescribed date which shall be verified by the learned Assessing Officer in consequential proceedings afresh. We thus restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the learned Assessing Officer in foregoing terms.

6.

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA No.1737/Del/2016 and 9671/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.