Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2025) 10 ITAT CK 2363

Kanchanjunga Power Company Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 15 October 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member · Manish Agarwal, Accountant Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 2662/Del/2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 243 words

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2019-20, arises against the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073629479(1) dated 24.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming to the assessee’s instant appeal, we note at the outset that the learned departmental authorities had conducted the search in question dated 01.11.2019 in M/s DNC Group of casesleading to initiation of Section 153C proceedings vide the Assessing Officer’s satisfaction/notice dated 12.10.2021 which finally culminated his assessment framed o n 27.05.2022 disallowing the expenditure in question u/s 37 of the Act. There could be har dly any dispute that we are de aling with an “unabated” assessment as on the date of search which is the s t date of satisfaction u/s 153C(1) 1 proviso wherein any additions has to be made in the assessee’s hands based on the specific seized material only as per PCIT Vs. Abhisar Builwell P. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC).

4.

Learned CIT-DR at this stage seeks to postpone the hearing in the instant assessee’s appeal. W e are o f the considered view that given the fact that there is no addition made on the basis of seized material, we reject the Reve nue’s adjournment to accept the assessee’s instant appeal in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.