AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.09.2025 of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25 (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN No : ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1081257996(1)arising out of the assessment order dated 30.03.2024 u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ACIT, Circle-32, New Delhi for AY: 2010-11.
On hearing both sides we find that ld. DR has basically relied the ground by which department has challenged the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) wherein after taking into consideration the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT, Central -1 Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. [2024 SCC Online Del 2439] the ld. CIT(A) has quashed the assessment order. 3. On going through relevant part of the impugned order and para 12.1 & 12.2 we observe that following factual and legal aspects have been considered:
“12.1As discussed in aforesaid paras, the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court in the matter has already now been delivered on 03.04.2024. Accordingly, on the aforesaid facts in the instant case of the appellant, following the judgement of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, it is held that the period of ten AYs' would commence being counted w.e.f the AY 2023-24, which, by backward counting, would terminate in AY 2014-15. Accordingly, respectfully following the aforesaid judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare (P.) Ltd (supra) in which the appellant's case for the impugned year under consideration is also tagged and forms part of List II as mentioned in the order, it is held that the notice issued u/s 153C of the Act on 28.09.2022 for the instant assessment year, AY 2010-11, wouldfall beyond the ambit of ten AYs' as provided under section 153C read with section 153A, and hence the impugned assessment order dated 30.03.2024 passed u/s 153C of the Act for the year in pursuance of such notice would not survive, having no legs to stand, and is thus annulled, being beyond the period of 10 years.
12.2As it is held that the Assessing Officer did not have the jurisdiction to assess the appellant's case for the AY. 2010-11, therefore, all the other grounds raised by the appellant are rendered academic in nature, and hence not required to be adjudicated upon. There is hence no adjudication on merits in this case.”
In the light of aforesaid circumstances as the ld. DR has relied the grounds of appeal and assessment order. The conclusions settled by ld. CIT(A) need no interference. We find no substance in the grounds of department. Thus, the appeal is dismissed.