Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs Rakesh Sharma

PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:

The appeals for condonation of delay of 26 days in filing appeals and the appeals filed by the appellant/Revenue are against separate orders dated 19.01.2026 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of separate assessment orders both dated 31.03.2023 of ld. Assessing Officer/ DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11 and A.Y. 2012-13 respectively.

Both the appeals involving similar facts, grounds and issues. So, both the appeals were heard together.

Brief facts of the cases through ITA No. 5907/Del/2026 are that the assessee filed original return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 25.03.2011 declaring income of Rs. 6,67,072/-. A search and seizure proceeding u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on the Alankit Group, Sh. Alok K Agarwal and some of the close associates and key employees of Sh. Alok K Agarwal on 18.10.2019. Incriminating seized evidences recovered during the course of search proceedings clearly establish that Sh. Alok Agarwal, had facilitated acquisition of shares of several shell entities for benefit of his own group as well as his known associates and clients. He has received and provided accommodation entries and also facilitated bogus short-term capital loss to set off long-term capital gains to various persons through several entities managed and controlled by him and his associates. Some incriminating documents were found from the premises in the name of the assessee; hence, case of the assessee was centralized to Central Circle-28, New Delhi. Notice u/s 153C of the Act dated 28.12.2021 was issued. The assessee filed his return of income on 10.01.2022 declaring income of Rs. 6,69,070/-. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 17.03.2023, notice u/s 142(1) of the act were issued on 05.02.2022, 08.03.2022, 23.09.2022. the assessee filed his submissions. On completion of proceedings, ld. AO vide order dated 31.03.2023 made addition of Rs. 1,19,82,500/- u/s 69A of the Act as per above discussion, Rs. 1,19,40,000/- u/s 69A and 3,58,200/- u/s 69C of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11.

Against separate assessment orders dated 31.03.2023 of ld. AO, the assessee filed appeals before Ld. CIT(A) which were allowed vide separate order dated 19.01.2026.

Being aggrieved, the Revenue preferred applications for condonation of delay of 26 days in filing appeals and appeals.

In application for condonation of delay of 26 days, it is submitted that the delay was due to heavy workload in time barring scrutiny cases, appeal effect etc. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of mala fides as the assessee has not gained anything by not filing of appeal within period of limitation. Therefore, the delay of 26 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal is condoned.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in relying upon judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of PCIT, Central Circle-1, Delhi vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 52/2024 even when Revenue has filed a SLP against decision.

Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee referred to chart in terms of judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi Ojjus Medicare pvt. Ltd. reads as under:

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19.01.2026, by following ratio of Jurisdictional High Court in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. had held the impugned assessment order dated 31.03.2023 to be illegal. Mere pendency of SLP against the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court is of no consequence. Therefore, the grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are rejected. The grounds of appeal of Revenue are rejected.

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue filed applications of delay of 26 days are allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed.