DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 32, DELHI vs. BETSY GROWTH FINANCE LTD, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1364/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2026AY 2010-113 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 held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153C were barred by limitation as the ten-year period for counting was from the date of recording the satisfaction note or issuing the notice. The assessment years in question fell outside this ten-year block period.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the ITAT's orders concerning assessment years 2010-11 and 2013-14, initiated under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The core issue revolved around the limitation period for such assessments.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was whether the assessment proceedings under Section 153C were initiated within the prescribed ten-year limitation period, considering the relevant date for commencement of the period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Respondent: Ms. Sita Shrivastava, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 04.06.2026Pronounced: 24.06.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 1364/Del/2026
ITA No. 1365/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 ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Judicial Member AND Shri Naveen Chandra, Accountant Member

ITA No. 1364/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 & ITA No. 1365/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14

DCIT, CC-32, Vs BETSY GROWTH FINANCE Room No. 359, 3rd floor, LTD., ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., SHOP NO. 5, A-32/33, New Delhi – 110 055 GROUND FLOOR, RAJU PARK, BALLI PAHALWAN APARTMENT DEVLI ROAD, KHANPUR, DELHI- 110 062 (PAN: AAACB3524B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Sita Shrivastava, CIT(DR)

Date of Hearing: 04.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 24.06.2026

ORDER Per Sudhir Kumar, JM: These are Revenues’ appeals filed against the respective orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi, involving proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Since in both the revenues’ appeals, the identical issues are involved, hence, the same were heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience, by dealing with ITA No. 1364/Del/2026 (AY 2010-11), being the lead case. 2. At the threshold, it is noted that the assessment proceedings u/s. 153C is barred by limitation as ten year period for Section 153C because the same is be counted from the date of recording of satisfaction note/date of issue of notice u/s. 153C. 3. Ld. DR argued that SLP is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order of the Hon’ble Court on this point of law, hence, the matter may be adjourned to some other date.

4.

After hearing the Ld. DR and perused the records, we find that in the instant case the satisfaction note was recorded by the AO of the searched person on 12.5.2022 and the notice u/s. 153C was issued on 30.6.2022, hence, the relevant year for counting ten years would be from FY 2022-23 i.e. AY 2023-24 and the 10 year would run till AY 2014-15. Thus, AY 2010-11 and AY 2013-14 would fall outside the 10 years block period, hence, the impugned assessment order dated 26.3.2024 & 31.3.2024 passed u/s. 153C of the Act for the years in pursuance of such notices would not survive, being beyond the period of 10 years and thus the same is invalid and deserve to be quashed in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jasjit Singh (supra) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare (P.) Ltd. For the sake of brevity, we reproduce the Head Notes of the aforesaid decisions :- “CIT vs Jasjit Singh-[2023| 155 taxmann.com 155 (SC)

From Headnote

"On appeal, Tribunal held that period for which assessee were required to file returns, commenced only from date when materials were forwarded to their jurisdictional Assessing officers - High Court upheld said order"

PCIT Vs Ojjus Medicare (P.) Ltd- [2024] 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi)

From Headnote

“Whether first proviso to section 153C, and which has been consistently recognized to also embody commencement point for reckoning six or ten assessment years, shifts relevant date from date of initiation of search or a requisition made to date of receipt of books of account or documents and assets seized by jurisdictional Assessing Officer of non-searched person - Held, yes"

5.

Respectfully following the aforesaid precedents, we are inclined to uphold the order of the ld. CIT (A) who has passed the well-reasoned and speaking order relying on the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed. Accordingly, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed for assessment year 2010- 11.

2 | P a g e

6.

As regards other appeal of revenue is concerned, the same is related to assessment year 2013-14, our decision given in assessment year 2010-11, as aforesaid will apply mutatis mutandis to this assessment year as well, being issue involved is identical in other remaining appeal of the Revenue also. Resultantly, the appeal for AY 2013-14 of the Revenue also stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner. 7. To sum up, both the Revenues’ appeals stand dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 24/06/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Naveen Chandra) (Sudhir Kumar) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 24/06/2026 *SR BHATNAGGAR* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 153C

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →