Sh. Sandeep vs DCIT

These assessee’s eight appeals ITA Nos. 3 945 to 3952/Del/2025, for A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2020-21, arise against the CIT(A)-31, Delhi’s in DIN & order Nos. TIBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074808468(1), 1074810935(1), 1074806874(1), 1074809950(1), 1074807482(1), 1074809226(1), 1074811935(1) and 1074812314(1) all dated 21.03.2025 in proceedings u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “ the Act”), respectively.

Heard both the p arties at length. Case files peruse d.

We notice at the outset during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant herein is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ action inter alia framing section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) assessme nts dated 30.03.2023, in furtherance to the search actio n dated 16.10.2019 in Navin Mahipal group of cases e tc.

That being the case, learned CIT -DR vehemently supports all the impugned asse ssments on legality as well as on merits wherein both the lower authorities have made protective additio ns under various heads invo lving varying sums. He quotes Lalji Haridas Vs. ITO (1961) 43 ITR 387 (SC) to buttress the point that as and when there arises the doubt in the learned asse ssing authority’s mind as to in w hose hands a particular he ad of inco me is to be assessed, it could indeed frame such a “protective” assessment to safeguard the Revenue’s interest.

Learned co unsel representing assessee on the o ther hand seeks to raise various legal arguments inter alia going to ro ot of the matter i.e. alleged improper recording of section 153C satisfaction and other re lated issues. The fact however remains that the corresponding “substantive” asse ssments are still stated to be pending before the learned C IT(A) as fairly informed by both the parties. We therefore deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to observe that all these “protective” asse ssments must await the final o utcome of the substantive appeals which are pending before the learned CIT(A) in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and mutually contradictory findings; as the case may be. We thus deem it appropriate in the larger intere st of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeals back to the lear ned CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication after awaiting the final outcome of the corresponding substantive assessments; as per law. Ordered according ly.

All other legal issues as well as those on merits b etween the parties are kept open at this stage.

These assessee’ s eight appeals ITA Nos. 3945 to 3952/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case file s.