DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JHANDEWALAN vs. MAHARAJA AGARSAIN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 3796/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2026AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

These are two appeals filed by the Revenue against the orders of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals arise from proceedings initiated under Section 153C read with Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The common search action was conducted on 18.10.2019 in M/s. Alankit Group of cases. Proceedings under Section 153C were initiated against the assessee, M/s. Maharaja Agarsain Builders Private Limited, on 16.09.2022. The assessments framed under Section 153C were quashed by the CIT(A). The Revenue is challenging the deletion of additions made under various sections, including Section 69A, 69C, 41(1), 37(1), and 68. A significant issue is the computation of the block period for assessment under Section 153C.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's grounds of appeal lacked merit. The Tribunal emphasized that various judicial precedents, including CIT-7 Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd., PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd., and CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh, have settled the issue that for the purpose of Section 153C(1), the calculation of the block period should be based on the date of receiving the concerned seized material by the assessee's jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had correctly applied these dates to conclude that none of the assessment years involved fell within the specified period of ten assessment years. Regarding the pending SLP in the Ojjus Medicare case, the Tribunal stated that the mere pendency of an SLP is not a ground to deviate from a binding decision of the jurisdictional High Court. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision quashing the Section 153C assessments. All other pleadings on merits were rendered academic. The Tribunal did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following questions: 1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 42,50,000/- made under Section 69A of the Act. 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,27,500/- made under Section 69C of the Act. 3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 19,26,486/- made under Section 41(1) of the Act. 4. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 16,30,153/- made under Section 37(1) of the Act. 5. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,85,94,693/- made under Section 68 of the Act. 6. Whether the computation of the block period under Sections 153C and 153A of the Act, as interpreted by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd., aligns with the legislative intent and procedural flexibility outlined in CBDT Circular No. 2/2018. 7. Whether the block periods for assessment under Section 153C of the Act have to be calculated from the date of receipt of seized material by the jurisdictional AO of the non-searched person, even when the law is clarified after the Finance Act, 2017, that the block period of 6AYs and 10AYs under Sections 153C and 153A have the same meaning and are to be calculated from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search is conducted. Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue argued that based on the date of search (18.10.2019), none of the impugned assessment years fall beyond the statutory period of ten assessment years as per Section 153A(1) read with the second proviso. The Revenue also highlighted that its Special Leave Petition against the Ojjus Medicare decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 69C,Section 41(1),Section 37(1),Section 68,Section 153A(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Shri Atishaya Jain, CA

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 3796/DEL/2026
ITA 3797/DEL/2026

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

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.3796 & 3797/Del/2026 for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s-25 orders, both dated 15.12.2025, having DINs and Orders No.

ITA 3

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,497 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →