New Delhi Realcon Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

These assessee’s instant three appeals ITA Nos.3489 to 3491/Del/2026 for assessment years 2018-19 to 2020-21, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s order, all dated 24.03.2026, having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1087848741(1), 1087848857(1) and 1087848973 (1) , involving proceedings under section 153C/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant has raised its first and foremost legal ground/argument challenging all the impugned section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) assessments framed by the learned Assessing Officer and upheld in the lower appellate discussion(s).

We advert to the basic relevant facts.

There is hardly any dispute between the parties that the learned departmental authorities had carried out search in issue in the case of Sh. Manoj Kumar on 14.10.2020 wherein it is alleged to have come across against the corresponding incriminating material against the assessee as well. There is further no issue between the parties that the assessee’s jurisdictional Assessing Officer; other than the searched party’s Assessing Officer, recorded his section 153C common satisfaction in its case on 12.01.2022 relating to all these assessment years 2018-19 to 2020-21 before us. Learned counsel has duly placed the same on record. A perusal thereof indicates that the learned Assessing Officer nowhere made it clear in the impugned satisfaction note dated 12.01.2022 that the alleged incriminating material sought to be proceeded against the assessee had a “bearing” on determination of its total income in all these assessment years.

Learned CIT(DR) at this stage vehemently supports the impugned satisfaction. His case is that it is nowhere mandatory for the Assessing Officer to specifically incorporate the word “bearing” on the determination of the assessee’s taxable income in such a satisfaction note u/s 153C of the Act.

We find no merit in the Revenue’s foregoing vehement objections as the instant issue stands squarely settled in the assessee’s favour and against the department going by Saksham Commodities Ltd. Vs. ITO (2024) 464 ITR 1 (Delhi)(HC) wherein their lordships have made it clear that the relevant satisfaction note must make it clear that the seized material sought to be used against the assessee indeed has a “bearing” of determination of its total taxable income. We thus accept the assessee’s instant first and foremost legal ground/argument to quash all these section 153C assessments in very terms.

All other pleadings on merits between the parties stand rendered academic.

These assessee’s three appeals ITA Nos.3489 to 3491/Del/2026 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.