RAKESH JAIN,DELHI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 16, DELHI, DELHI

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.3438 & 3439/Del/2026 for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s -26 orders dated 25.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1086525202(1) & 1086290036(1), involving proceedings under

ITA Nos.3438 & 3439/Del/2026

section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. We notice at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) assessment itself in light of the relevant facts narrated hereunder. There is no dispute between the parties that the learned lower authorities had carried out section 132 search action at the assessee’s premises on 02.11.2017. And that the learned Assessing Officer; after section 127 “centralization” order dated 21.08.2018; recorded his section 153C satisfaction, followed by his corresponding notice issued on 21.10.2019. There is further no dispute that all this culminated in section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A assessments in the assessee’s cases making section 14A additions of Rs.4,56,018/- in AY 2014-15 and Rs.6,86,196/- in AY 2015-16, which stand upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 3. Faced with this situation, learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute the clinching fact emerging from the case files that the impugned assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16 are “unabated” one since the departmental

2 | P a g e

ITA Nos.3438 & 3439/Del/2026

authorities had carried out section 132 search action in assessee’s case on 02.11.2017, which led to initiation of section 153A proceedings. And that hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in PCIT Vs. Abhisar Builwell P. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) has settled the law that such an addition involving an “unabated” assessment has to be based on the seized/incriminating material only. 4. We note from the case files that there is not even an iota of evidence indicating that the learned Assessing Officer has made the addition in assessee’s hands based on such an incriminating material. We thus find it a fit case to delete the impugned section 14A additions of Rs.4,56,018/- in AY 2014-15 and Rs.6,86,196/- in AY 2015- in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 5. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 3438 & 3439/Del/2026 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd August, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13th August, 2026. 3 | P a g e

ITA Nos.3438 & 3439/Del/2026

RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

4 | P a g e