2026 (3) TMI 323

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A)) in Appeal Nos. CIT(A), Delhi-29 10122/2011-12 and CIT(A), Delhi-29, 10123/2011-12 and arising out of the respective assessment orders dated 03.02.2023 passed by the DCIT, CC-28, New Delhi passed u/s 153 r.w.s144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2.2 The facts in ITA Nos.- 661/Del/2025 and 657/Del/2025 A.Y. 2012-13, are identical. 2.3 The case of Sri Rajesh Gandhi in ITA No. 661/Del/2025 for A.Y. 2012-13 is taken as a lead case. 3. Brief facts of the case: The original return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, was e-filed by the assessee on 21.08.2013 vide acknowledgment no. 755657160210813 declaring income of Rs. 1,70,410/-. The AO noted that the major source of income of the assessee was from business. Further, the AO noted that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 14.10.2020 in the case of Sh. Manoj Kumar Singh. his close associates and few transacting parties with whom Sh. Manoj Kumar Singh had entered into unaccounted cash transactions. Further, the AO noted that parallelly a search action was carried out at the residence of Sh. Narendra Mantri at H. No. 28, 2n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k period of ten assessment years would be from A.Y. 2014-15 to A.Y. 2023-24 and accordingly, for the purposes of section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer will not have jurisdiction for A.Y. 2012-13. In this regard, the submission filed by the assessee is reproduced as under: " PCIT vs Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd [2024] 465 ITR 101 (Delhi) [DoD: 03/04/2024] The notice u/s 153C was issued on 27/05/2022 for the AY 2012-13, the FY: 01/04/2022 to 31/03/2023, the relevant the AY 2023-24, However, no copy of any satisfaction note has been given which in fact does not even exist as also not mentioned in the impugned assessment order also. The ten AYs' would have to be computed from 31/03/2023 with the said date indubitably constituting the end of the AY relevant to the previous year of search. Viewed in light of the above, the block period of 10 AYs' would be as follows as per para no. 90 of the judgment in Ojjus: Computation of the ten-year block period as provided u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act No. of Years AY 2023-24 1 AY 2022-23 2 AY 2021-22 3 AY 2020-21 4 AY 2019-20 5 AY 2018-19 6 AY 2017-18 7 AY 2016-17 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... year of search in the assessee's case would become A.Y 2023-24 and 10 years counting backwards would come to only upto A.Y 2014-15. Accordingly, for the purposes of section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer will not have jurisdiction for A.Ys 2010-11 to A.Y 2013-14. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision in the case of Jasjit Singh (2023) 155 taxmann.com 155(SC) and PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare [P] Ltd 161 taxmann.com 160. The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed for quashing the assessment made u/s 153C of the Act for the A.Ys under consideration. 10. Per contra, the ld. DR stated that the ld. CIT(A) has based his order without seeking remand report on the issue of satisfaction note. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Challenge is to the validity of the assessment order framed u/s 153C of the Act for the reason that the impugned A.Ys are beyond the block of six/ten A.Ys, as per provisions of the Act. It is a settled proposition of law that as per provisions of section 153C of the Act, for taking action u/s 153C of the Act, date of search in the case of the other person, would be date of rec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in CIT v Jasjit Singh 2023 SCC Online SC1265. The aforesaid legal position also stood reiterated by the Supreme Court in ITO v. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia 2023 SCC Online Supreme Court. 14. In view of the settled law as deliberated above, we find that the satisfaction note for the non-searched person i.e., the assessee, was recorded on 24.06.2022 and therefore on the basis of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh [supra], the deemed year of search for the assessee will be FY 2022- 23 relevant to AY 2023-24. The 10 years (i.e. 1+6+3) years calculation from AY 2023-24 backward comes to AY 2014-15 only. Accordingly, for the purpose of section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer will not have the jurisdiction for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 in the case of the assessee as the same are beyond the block of ten A.Ys which starts from A.Y 2013-14. 15. Considering the facts of the case in totality, in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court [supra], we have no hesitation in quashing the impugned assessment order for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13. Since we have quashed the assessment order, we do not find it necessary to dwell....