DCIT vs Om Prakash Gupta

PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM:

These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 24.11.2025 for the Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2013-14.

At the time of filing of appeals, the Registry has pointed out a defect that appeals are time barred by 7 days. In response thereof, the ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeals. Accordingly, he prayed that the delay in filing the appeals may be condoned. We have heard both the counsels on the issue of condonation of delay. In our considered opinion, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeals. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal.

Since the issues are common and the appeals are connected, hence the same are heard together and being disposed off by this common order. We take up the assessee’s appeal being ITA No.2426/Del/2025 for AY 2010-11 as lead case to adjudicate the issues under consideration.

At the outset, it is brought to our notice that search action was initiated on Alankrit Group and other persons on 18.10.2019 and proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) were initiated in the case of the assessee in the year under consideration. It is fact on record that satisfaction note was recorded by the AO of the searched person on 24.06.2022 and ld. CIT (A) considering the facts available on record observed that the block of 10 assessment years would be reckoned from the date of handing over of searched material or date of recording of satisfaction by the AO of the searched person. By relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 161 taxmann.com 160 and PCIT vs. Amol Awasthi, ld. CIT (A) held that the assessment under consideration is outside the purview of the provisions of section 153C of the Act. Accordingly, he held that following the judicial precedents as discussed by him in his order, the action of the AO in initiating the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act for the AY under consideration is annulled.

Aggrieved with the above order, Revenue is in appeal before us.

Considered the submissions of both the parties and material placed on record. We observed that the issue under consideration is whether the year of search should be reckoned from the date of handing over of the searched material by the AO of the searched person or from the date of original search to initiate the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. We observed that this issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd.(supra) and PCIT vs. Amol Awasthi and the ld. CIT (A) has rightly followed the same, respectfully following the above decisions, we are inclined not to disturb the findings of the ld. CIT (A) and the same is accordingly upheld.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Since the facts in AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 are exactly similar to Assessment Year 2010-11, our above findings in AY 2010-11 are applicable mutatis mutandis in AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 are dismissed.

To sum up : all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.