AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM.:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22/09/2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi, under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 10/03/2024 passed by the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 153C of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15.
The grounds of appeal preferred by the Assessee are as under:-
“1.That the order passed by the Ld. AO and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts, bad in law and must be quashed as the assessment is barred by limitation. AY 2014-15 falls outside the permissible six-year block reckoned from FY 2022-23, the year of document handover to the AO of the appellant.
2.That the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in invoking Explanation 1 to the fourth proviso of section 153A to justify assessment for AY 2014-15 without establishing the statutory preconditions of income escaping assessment in the form of assets exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs.
3.That the addition of Rs. 58,18,747 u/s 69A on account of unsecured loan repayments is unjustified, arbitrary, and made without disproving the genuineness of transactions or identifying any defect in the documentary evidence submitted.
4.That the addition of Rs. 1,74,562 u/s 69C as alleged commission payment is based on mere assumption and surmise, without any corroborative evidence or inquiry, and hence deserves to be deleted.
5.That the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the legal and factual submissions made by the appellant and erred in upholding the additions without proper adjudication.
6.That the appellant craves the leave to add, amend, modify, delete any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.
Therefore, it is prayed that the notice/order under question may kindly be quashed. However, as an alternative it is also prayed that the addition may kindly be quashed.”
Brief facts leading to the case is this that a search was conducted on 18.10.2019 in the Alankit Group and satisfaction was recorded by the Ld. A.O. of the searched person on 24th June, 2022 copy whereof is appearing at page 247 of the paper book filed before us.
Thereafter, satisfaction was recorded by the A.O. of the assessee only on 2nd December, 2022 appearing at Page No. 248 to 249 of the Paper Book filed before us, contents whereof as follows:
Having regard to the satisfaction recorded by the Ld. A.O. dated 22.12.2022, the relevant year for reassessment i.e. six preceding years from the year ending on 31st March, 2023 i.e. Financial Year 2022-23, A.Y 2023-24 would be from A.Y 2022-23 to 2017-18. The search assessment under Section 153C could have been carried out, therefore, only for A.Y 2017-18 to 2022-23 and the instant reassessment under Section 153C of the Act for A.Y 2014-15, is as barred by limitation as the crux of the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Assessee Ms. Chinu Bhasin has not been able to be controverted by the Ld. DR.
On this issue, the Ld. AR relied upon the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P.) Ltd. Reported in [2024] 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi). The observation made the Hon’ble Court is as follows:
“80.The aforesaid discussion thus renders a determinative quietus to the identification of the starting post from which the block of six AYs' or the "relevant assessment year" would have to be calculated. The contention of the respondents that the said block periods would have to be reckoned with reference to the date of search thus can neither be countenanced nor possibly accepted. That submission is clearly addressed contrary to a long and consistent line of precedents which have held to the contrary and which unequivocally accepted the point of commencement for the purposes of identifying the six or the "relevant assessment year" to be etched from the date of handover of documents, assets or things to the AO of the non-searched party.”
Respectfully relying upon the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi as above and considering the facts of the matter the re-assessment made under Section 153C of the Act for A.Y 2014-15 is found to be without jurisdiction, void ab-initio, not sustainable in the eyes of law and therefore, quashed.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed.