DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. RAKESH SHARMA, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5907/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 August 2026AY 2010-116 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the Revenue's appeals. It upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to deem the assessment orders illegal, following a jurisdictional High Court judgment, despite the pendency of an SLP against it.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders which had allowed the assessee's appeals against assessment orders. The assessment orders involved additions under sections 69A and 69C of the Income Tax Act based on search proceedings related to accommodation entries and bogus losses.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in relying on a High Court judgment against which an SLP was pending, and whether the assessment orders were illegal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 153C,Section 132,Section 139(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Vinod Gupta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, CIT- DR
Hearing: 20.08.2026Pronounced: 20.08.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 5907/Del/2026
ITA No. 5908/Del/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5907/Del/2026, A.Y. 2010-11 ITA No. 5908/Del/2026, A.Y. 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Rakesh Sharma Income Tax, B-385, 2nd Floor, Office of the DCIT, Nirman Vihar, Central Circle-28, New Delhi New Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAUPS9208G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Sumit Lalchandani, Adv. Sh. Vinod Gupta, AR. Sh. Shivam Yadav, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Robin Rawal, CIT- DR Date of Hearing 20.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement 20.08.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeals for condonation of delay of 26 days in filing appeals and the appeals filed by the appellant/Revenue are against separate orders dated 19.01.2026 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 5907 & 5908/Del/2026 Rakesh Sharma

[hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of separate assessment orders both dated 31.03.2023 of ld. Assessing Officer/ DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11 and A.Y. 2012-13 respectively.

Both the appeals involving similar facts, grounds and issues. So, both the appeals were heard together.

ITA No. 5907/Del/2026

2.

Brief facts of the cases through ITA No. 5907/Del/2026 are that the assessee filed original return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 25.03.2011 declaring income of Rs. 6,67,072/-. A search and seizure proceeding u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on the Alankit Group, Sh. Alok K Agarwal and some of the close associates and key employees of Sh. Alok K Agarwal on 18.10.2019. Incriminating seized evidences recovered during the course of search proceedings clearly establish that Sh. Alok Agarwal, had facilitated acquisition of shares of several shell entities for benefit of his own group as well as his known associates and clients. He has received and provided accommodation entries and also facilitated bogus short-term capital loss to set off long-term

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 5907 & 5908/Del/2026 Rakesh Sharma

capital gains to various persons through several entities managed and controlled by him and his associates. Some incriminating documents were found from the premises in the name of the assessee; hence, case of the assessee was centralized to Central Circle-28, New Delhi. Notice u/s 153C of the Act dated 28.12.2021 was issued. The assessee filed his return of income on 10.01.2022 declaring income of Rs. 6,69,070/-. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 17.03.2023, notice u/s 142(1) of the act were issued on 05.02.2022, 08.03.2022, 23.09.2022. the assessee filed his submissions. On completion of proceedings, ld. AO vide order dated 31.03.2023 made addition of Rs. 1,19,82,500/- u/s 69A of the Act as per above discussion, Rs. 1,19,40,000/- u/s 69A and 3,58,200/- u/s 69C of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11.

2.1 Likewise in ITA No. 5908/Del/2026, Ld. AO made addition of Rs. 5,32,50,000/- u/s 69A of the Act, Rs. 1,94,94,000/- u/s 69A of the Act, 1,55,57,000/- u/s 69A of the Act, 32,50,000/- u/s 69C of the Act and Rs. 5,84,820/- u/s 69C of the Act.

3.

Against separate assessment orders dated 31.03.2023 of ld. AO, the assessee filed appeals before Ld. CIT(A) which were allowed vide separate order dated 19.01.2026.

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 5907 & 5908/Del/2026 Rakesh Sharma

4.

Being aggrieved, the Revenue preferred applications for condonation of delay of 26 days in filing appeals and appeals.

5.

In application for condonation of delay of 26 days, it is submitted that the delay was due to heavy workload in time barring scrutiny cases, appeal effect etc. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of mala fides as the assessee has not gained anything by not filing of appeal within period of limitation. Therefore, the delay of 26 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal is condoned.

6.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in relying upon judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of PCIT, Central Circle-1, Delhi vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 52/2024 even when Revenue has filed a SLP against decision.

7.

Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee referred to chart in terms of judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi Ojjus Medicare pvt. Ltd. reads as under:

P a g e | 5 ITA No. 5907 & 5908/Del/2026 Rakesh Sharma

8.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19.01.2026, by following ratio of Jurisdictional High Court in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. had held the impugned assessment order dated 31.03.2023 to be illegal. Mere pendency of SLP against the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court is of no consequence. Therefore, the grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are rejected. The grounds of appeal of Revenue are rejected.

9.

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue filed applications of delay of 26 days are allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed.

P a g e | 6 ITA No. 5907 & 5908/Del/2026 Rakesh Sharma

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASHI) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 07.09.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →