AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s DIN No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1080350535(1) dated 04.09.2025, involving proceedings under section143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
We notice at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned section 143(3) r.w.s.153C assessment itself, framed by the learned Assessing Officer on 11.02.2024 in the assessee’s case. This is for the precise reason that in pursuance to the impugned search action dated 18.10.2019 carried out in M/s Alankit Group of Cases, learned Assessing Officer; be it for that of the searched person (s) or of the assessee, as the case may be, went on to record the corresponding twin satisfaction, dated 10th of May, 2022 and 24th of June, 2022, respectively, as enclosed in pages 215 to 218 of the case records.
That being the case, the learned CIT(DR) would hardly dispute that there is no clear cut indication in the aforesaid section 153C satisfaction (s) as to whether the corresponding seized material had ‘a bearing’ on determination of assessee’s taxable income or not, as held mandatory in Saksham Commodities Ltd. vs ITO (2024) 464 ITR 1 (Delhi) (HC). We thus, conclude in this factual matrix that learned Assessing Officer impugned assessment herein dated 11.02.2024 based on search section 153C satisfaction could not be held as sustainable in law. The same is hereby quashed as a non-est one in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
All remaining pleadings between parties on merits stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.