ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 16, DELHI, DELHI vs. M/S ANGEL PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6907/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 April 2026AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the assessments framed under Section 153C were barred by limitation. The assessment years fell outside the permissible block period of 10 years from the date of the satisfaction note.

What were the facts?

A search operation on Alankit Group led to seized documents pertaining to M/s. Angel Promoters P. Ltd. A satisfaction note for the assessee was recorded on 07.02.2023, and assessment orders were passed on 14.03.2024 for AYs 2010-11 to 2013-14 under Section 153C.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessments framed under Section 153C for the specified assessment years were within the limitation period as per the satisfaction note date and the block period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153C,Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

Hearing: 09.04.2026Pronounced: 29.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.6904 to 6907/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2010-11 to 2013-14] ACIT Vs. M/s. Angel Promoters Private Central Circle 16 Limited D-848, Basement Zakir Delhi Nagar SO, New Friends Colony, S.O. South East Delhi Appellant Respondent

Appellant by Sh. N.K. Bansal, CIT DR Respondent by Sh. Sanjeev Kwatra, CA Date of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 29.04.2026 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. All these appeals are filed by the revenue against different orders of the Ld. CIT(A), Delhi for the A.Ys. 2010- 11 to 2013-14 in holding that the assessments framed are barred by limitation.

2.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the orders of the AO/CIT(A) we observed that a search and seizure operation u/s.132 of

the Act was conducted on 08.10.2019 in the case of M/s. Alankit Group. Pursuant to said search and seizure proceedings certain seized documents pertaining to the assessee i.e., M/s. Angel Promoters P. Ltd. were found. A satisfaction note was recorded on 21.06.2022 and the relevant seized materials were handed over to the AO of the assessee. The AO of the assessee recorded a satisfaction note on 07.02.2023 and passed assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act on 14.03.2024 making certain additions u/s.68 of the Act and 69C of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the satisfaction note in the case of the assessee was recorded on 07.02.2023 the deemed search in the case of the assessee for the purpose of section 153C of the Act shall be on 07.02.2023 and the first assessment year will be A.Y. 2024- 25 and the ten preceding assessment years will end with assessment year 2014-15. Thus, the assessments framed u/s.153C for the A.Ys 2010-11 to 2013-14 are out of block period of 10 years, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (161 taxmann.com 160).

3.

The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicate Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that the assessments framed u/s.153C r.w.s. 143(3) for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 are barred by limitation and accordingly the assessments were quashed. Page | 2

The Ld. Counsel, therefore, submitted that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

We find merit in the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) quashed the assessments framed u/s.153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for the A.Y. 2010- 11 to 2013-14 following the decision of the jurisdictional High court in the case of PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra) for the reason that these assessment years falls beyond the block period of 10 years. We see no valid reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, sustaining the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the grounds of appeal of the revenue for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 are hereby rejected.

5.

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [RENU JAUHRI] [C.N. PRASAD] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.04.2026

NEHA , Sr.P.S.* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →