Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals arise from assessments under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) & 144C following a search action. The Assessing Officer disallowed the assessee's alleged losses under Section 94(vii) by treating transactions with M/s JM Mutual Funds as sham.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessments were invalid as the additions were not based on specific seized material, a mandatory condition as per the Supreme Court decision in PCIT Vs. Abhisar Builwell P. Ltd. The assessee's legal arguments to quash the assessments were found meritorious.
Key Issues
The primary issue was the validity of assessments framed under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) & 144C without being based on seized material.
Sections Cited
153A, 143(3), 144C, 132, 94(vii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh
Asstt. Year: 2017-18 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 DCIT, Vs Maridu Hari Dalmia, Central Circle-1, 4, Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AADPD6744R Assessee by : Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Amisha S. Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These three Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 4582, 4583 & 4586/Del/2024, for Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, arise against the CIT(A)-23, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1066853569(1), 1066853790(1) & 1066854965(1) dated 09.07.2024, 19.07.2024 & 20.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) & 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of all these section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C assessments; framed on 19.05.2023, by the Assessing Officer in furtherance to the department’s section 132 search action in M/s Dalmia Group of cases. There is no dispute between the parties that all the three impugned assessment years herein A.Ys. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 are “unabated” assessments as on the date of search wherein any addition in the assessee’s hands has to be made as to be based upon the contents of the corresponding seized material only as per PCIT Vs. Abhisar Builwell P. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC).
The above being the clinching factual position, there would be again no issue between the parties that the learned Assessing Officer herein had disallowed the assessee’s alleged losses u/s 94(vii) of the Act hereby holding the corresponding transactions with M/s JM Mutual Funds, as sham ones only followed by his yet another estimated actual profit; both involving varying sums, in these three assessment years. We wish to emphasize here that neither the impugned additions is based on the corresponding specific seized material as it forms a mandatory condition in light of their lordships decision. We thus find merit in the assessee’s legal arguments to quash all these assessments herein in very terms. Ordered accordingly. These three Revenue’s appeal fail accordingly.
All other pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.