VIVEK GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, DELHI., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7340/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2026AY 2016-176 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Income Tax Officer lacked the inherent jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 153C as the assessee's returned income exceeded the prescribed monetary limits for non-corporate entities in metro cities. Therefore, the assessment orders were set aside.

What were the facts?

Search proceedings were initiated against the Alankit Group, leading to assessment proceedings against the assessee under Section 153C. The assessee's appeals against the assessment orders were dismissed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the Income Tax Officer had the proper jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 153C based on the assessee's returned income and CBDT instructions.

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

Before: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv, Sh. Sumit Lal, Adv &, Ms. Sejal Arora, Adv
Hearing: 25/03/2026Pronounced: 21/05/2026

1 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 7340/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 7341/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17)

Vivek Gupta Vs DCIT BT-36, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi- Central Circle-26 110088, New Delhi Delhi PAN: AJJPG6648L

Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv, Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv, Sh. Shivam Yadav, Adv & Ms. Sejal Arora, Adv Revenue by Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Date of Hearing 25/03/2026 Date of Pronouncement 21/05/2026

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned Appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders

of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’

for short), New Delhi dated 08/10/2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-

16 and 2016-17 respectively.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure proceedings

was carried out on the Alankit Group on 18/10/2019. Assessment

proceedings have been initiated against the Assessee u/s 153C of the

2 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short). Assessment orders came to be

passed on 11/03/2024 for Assessment Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 by

making certain additions. As against the Assessment Orders dated

11/03/2024, Assessee preferred Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.

CIT(A) vide orders dated 08/10/2025,dismissed the Appeals of the

Assessee. As against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee preferred the

captioned Appeals.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the

Assessee is a non-corporate entity situated in a Metro city, therefore,

monetary limits prescribed by the CBDT under Instruction No.1/2011

dated 31/01/2011 is applicable which, stipulates that in respect of non-

corporate Assessee’s in Metro Cities, the jurisdiction is bifurcated based

on returned income. The cases involving returned income up to

20,00,000/- being assigned to the Income Tax Officer and other cases

where the returned income exceeds 20,00,000/- falls with the

jurisdiction of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax/Assistant

Commission of Income Tax. Further submitted that on the date of

issuance of notice u/s 153C of the Act i.e. 29/06/2022.The returned

income of the Assessee was Rs. 62,50,520/-, which is far in excess than

the threshold of Rs. 20,00,000/-. Therefore, the jurisdiction over the

Assessee vested with DCIT/ACIT and not the Income Tax Officer.

3 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

Thus,submitted that the initiating of proceedings u/s 153C of the Act by

an Income Tax Officer, who on that date, lacked inherent jurisdiction

over the Assessee. Thus, relying on the Judgment of Hon'ble High Court

of Calcutta in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s Shree Shoppers Ltd., in ITA

39/2023 dated 15/03/2023,Ashok Devichand Jain Vs. Union of India

[2023] 151 taxmann.com 70 (Bombay) and other judicial precedents,

sought for allowing the Ground No. 3 of the Assessee and also sought for

setting aside the assessment order.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the

assessment proceedings has been initiated by the Officer who is

competent to frame the assessment and the assessment has been framed

in accordance with law and the Ground No. 3 of the Assessee is a hyper

technical which cannot be entertained by the Tribunal in this stage.

Thus, relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal

of the Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available

on record.In the present case, the notice u/s 153C has been issued on

29/06/2022, which is for the relevant Financial year 2022-23 and the

corresponding Assessment Year would be Assessment Year 2023-24.

This would be taken as the first year, and the block period would

4 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

accordingly be computed backwards. The Assessee has produced the

Chart which is reproduced as under:-

6.

It is evident from the above chart that in the block period, the

returned income of the Assessee exceeds threshold of 29,00,000/-

prescribed by the CBDT Instruction 1/2021, therefore, the DCIT/ACIT

shall have jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. A

perusal of the aforesaid chart clearly demonstrates that, even within

this block period, the returned income of the assessee exceeds the

threshold limit prescribed under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011.

Therefore, jurisdiction could not have been exercised by the Income Tax

5 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

Officer and ought to have been exercised only by the DCIT/ACIT.

However, in the present case the proceedings have been initiated by the

Income Tax Officer who lacks inherent jurisdiction of the Assessee to

initiate proceedings u/s 153C of the Act.

7.

In view of the above, we find merits in the Ground No. 3 of the

Assessee, accordingly, the assessment orders passed by the A.O. which

has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) are hereby set aside.

8.

Since, we have allowed the Ground No. 3 of the Assessee other

grounds of Appeal of the Assessee renders become in-fructuous.

9.

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 21 .05.2026 Reshma Naheed, Sr.P.S Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

6 ITA No. 7340& 7341/Del/2025 Vivek Gupta Vs. DCIT

More judgments on Section 153C

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →