AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: These twin assessees’ as many appeals ITA Nos. 882 & 883/Del/2026; both for assessment year 2017-18, arise against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi-25’s orders both dated 18.11.2025, passed in DINs & order nos. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1082735937(1) & ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1082737737(1), involving proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively.
Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
It emerges at the outset that both these assessees/appellants canvass their first and foremost identical legal ground challenging validity of the impugned section 153C proceedings initiated in their respective cases for want of a valid satisfaction note thereunder. That being the case, learned counsel places on record the Assessing Officer’s satisfaction note(s) dated 24.06.2022 initiating the impugned proceedings wherein there is not even an iota of discussion as to whether the corresponding seized material in fact “belonged to” or “pertained to” or “related to” therein; as prescribed in clause (a) and (b) to section 153C of the Act. This clinching factual position has gone unrebutted from the Revenue side. We accordingly quote Super Malls (P.) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, 8 New Delhi [2020] 115 taxmann.com 105 (SC) that these twin assessees’ impugned as many assessments framed u/s 153C of the Act are not liable to be sustained for want of a valid satisfaction recorded thereunder. The same are hereby quashed in very terms therefore.
All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.
2 | P a g e
These twin assessees’ appeal ITA Nos. 882 & 883/Del/2026 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
3 | P a g e