TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 453
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nces of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the tenyear period would have to be reckoned from the 31st day of March of the AY relevant to the year of search and not from the AY immediately preceding the year of search, even when Para 80 of CBDT's Circular No.2/2018 dated 15 February 2018 clarifies the intent of the Legislature while introducing the amendment in Finance Act 2017 by stating that the expression "relevant assessment year" as appearing in section 153A is envisaged to mean the four assessment years in addition to the preceding six AYs which are calculated from AY before the year of search? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in relyi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h other. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal." 2. Rival submissions of the parties have been heard and record perused. At the outset of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submits that grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are covered by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in case of DCIT Vs Ankit Agarwal in ITA No.3703/Del/2025 for AY 2010-11 dated 07.11.2025, wherein the bench of Tribunal relied upon the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) (465 ITR 101) (Del.). The Ld. AR of the assessee while explaining the facts of the case submits that a sea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on various case laws relied by Ld. AR of the assessee. We find that on similar grounds of appeal, the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in DCIT vs. Ankit Agarwal (supra) in group case, on similar set of fact on similar ground of appeal passed the following order: "8. We find that the above issue is squarely covered by the judgement rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in favor of Assessee' in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Limited and (F)] 2024:DHC:2629-DB and KanhaiyaLalBothra V. Union of India. W.P.(C) 13968/20196. 9. In the facts of the present case where the search was conducted on 18.10.2019, the relevant assessment year in accordance with Explanation 1 of section 153A, would become AY 2020-21. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n AYs'. The significant difference between the two however is that while the six AYs' hinge upon the phrase "immediately preceding" the AY pertaining to the search year, the ten AYs' are liable to be computed or reckoned from the end of the AY relevant to the year of search. In our considered opinion, the petitioners have correctly identified the aforesaid distinction as being crucial and determinative for the purposes of reckoning the six and the ten AY block period. ******* 89. That takes us then to the issue of identifying the "relevant assessment year" for the purposes of computing the ten year block. Explanation 1 to section 153A specifies the manner in which the entire ten AY period is to be computed. Whi....