TAX (CENTRAL)-I vs. NAGESHWAR INVESTMENT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/406/2015HC Delhi20 July 20154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the principle of law settled in the Pepsico judgment regarding the interpretation of 'belongs to' in Section 153C would apply irrespective of the form of the recovered document. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) relied on a previous Delhi High Court judgment in Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. ACIT. The Revenue argued that this judgment was pending in the Supreme Court and that other ITAT decisions relied upon were also under appeal. The High Court noted that no stay had been granted on the Pepsico judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether the interpretation of 'belongs to' in Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as settled in the Pepsico judgment, applies to the present case, and if the pendency of appeals or SLPs affects the applicability of the settled principle.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

ITA Nos. 406, 407, 408 & 409 of 2015

Page 1 of 4

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 5. +

ITA 406/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Advocate.

versus

NAGESHWAR INVESTMENT LTD.

..... Respondent

WITH

6.

+

ITA 407/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Advocate.

versus

NAGESHWAR INVESTMENT LTD.

..... Respondent

WITH

7.

+

ITA 408/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Advocate.

versus

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 22:01:08

ITA Nos. 406, 407, 408 & 409 of 2015

Page 2 of 4

NAGESHWAR INVESTMENT LTD.

..... Respondent

AND

8.

+

ITA 409/2015

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Advocate.

versus

NAGESHWAR INVESTMENT LTD.

..... Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R %

20.07.2015

CM Nos. 11910/2015, 11911/2015 & 11912/2015 (for exemption) 1. Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The applications are disposed of. ITA Nos. 406/2015, 407/2015, 408/2015 & 409/2015 3. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) has in the common impugned order dated 28th November 2014 pertaining to Assessment Years („AYs‟) 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 relied upon, inter alia, on This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 22:01:08

ITA Nos. 406, 407, 408 & 409 of 2015

Page 3 of 4

the judgment of this Court in Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. ACIT [2015] 370 ITR 295 (Delhi). It is stated that the judgment of this Court in Pepsico is pending consideration in a special leave petition in the Supreme Court. However no stay has been granted of the operation of the judgment of this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the ITAT has also relied on the decision of its coordinate Bench in V.K. Fiscal Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (ITA Nos. 5460-5465/Del/2012) which in turn relied on an earlier order of the ITAT in DSL Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (ITA No. 11349/Del/2012). He states that the decision of the ITAT in DSL Properties Pvt. Ltd (supra) is the subject matter of a separate appeal in this Court being ITA No. 585/2013 which is pending consideration. He accordingly prays that these appeals be taken up with ITA No. 585/2013.

5.

The Court is of the view that the essential principle of law that has been settled by this Court in Pepsico in regard to the interpretation of the words “belongs to” in Section 153 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would apply on all fours to the facts of the present case irrespective of whether the document recovered (viz., the accounts) is in the form of a hard copy or a hard disk. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 22:01:08

ITA Nos. 406, 407, 408 & 409 of 2015

Page 4 of 4

Consequently, the Court does not find any error in the impugned order of the ITAT which gives rise to a substantial question of law.

6.

The appeals are dismissed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J

VIBHU BAKHRU, J JULY 20, 2015/dn This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 22:01:08

More judgments on Section 153C

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →