AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 9049 & 9050/Del/2025; for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15, arise against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, ‘CIT(A)’), Delhi-25’s orders dated 22.12.2025, passed in DIN & Order Nos. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083957610(1) & ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083957463(1), involving proceedings u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’, respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
Learned co unsel representing the assessee raises its first and foremost legal ground go ing to the roo t of the matter that this is a clearcut case of no n-recording o f a pro per satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act which renders the twin assessments herein; both framed on 25.03.2003 has no n-e st ones in the eyes of law.
That be ing the case, we hereby notice fro m a perusal of the case record that the assessee’ s learned Assessing Officer had recorded his latter round of satisfaction o n 14.02 .2022 followed by his notice issued initiating the proceedings o n 18.02.2022 in its case. And that the said satisfaction note nowhere make s it clear that the relevant seized material at “a bearing” on determinatio n of the assessee’s total taxable income.
Learned CIT(DR) vehement states in this factual backdrop that we o ught to appreciate the totality of circumstances wherein such a satisfaction no te may not always state that the corresponding seized material must have “a bearing” e xplicitly in his latter round of satisfaction.
We are afraid that Revenue’s foregoing stand hardly deserves to be accepte d once case law Saksham Commodities Ltd. Vs. ITO (2024) 464 ITR 1 (Delhi). He has already settled the issue in the assessee’s favour that such a failure on the Assessing Officer’s part is very much fatal to validity of the impugned proceedings. Ordered accordingly. All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allo wed. A copy of this common order be placed in the separate case files.