DCIT, DELHI vs. SUBODH KANT SAHAY HUF, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8444/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 April 2026AY 2014-154 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 year 2014-15 falls beyond the 6-year period specified in Section 153C(1) of the Act, considering the relevant date for calculating this period. The conclusion of the CIT(A) on this matter was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessment proceeding under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act was initiated for AY 2014-15 based on a search and seizure operation conducted on others. The satisfaction note for the non-searched person was recorded on 24.06.2022, making AY 2023-24 the relevant search assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment year 2014-15 is within the 6-year period for assessment under Section 153C when the satisfaction note was recorded much later.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 132,Section 153C(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA&

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. ShivamYadav, Adv, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv
Hearing: 30.03.2026Pronounced: 08.04.2026

(Assessment Year:2014-15) DCIT Vs. Subodh Kant Sahay HUF Room No. 348, E-2, ARA 302, NavSansadVihar, Centre, Jhandewalan, Sector-22 Plat 4, Extn. New Delhi Dwarka, Raj Nagar-II 110055 Delhi – 110077 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAJHS1872H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. SumitLalchandani, Adv. Sh. ShivamYadav, Adv. Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 30.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 25.08.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A)-25New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN: ITBA/APL/M/250/2025- P a g e | Subodh Kumar Sahay HUF (AY: 2014-15) 26/1079958419(1) arising out of the order dated 20.03.2024 u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the DCIT, CC-27, New Delhi, for AY: 2014-15.

2.

The case were heard together as they involved common question of law and facts. The department has challenged the impugned order of ld. First Appellate Authority which has held that the assessment years involved fall beyond the block period for which assessment u/s 153C of the Act could have been concluded. Although ld. DR has relied the grounds what we find material is that admittedly the background to the search assessment u/s 153C of the Act are search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 of the Act carried out on 18.10.2019 at the premises of Shri Alok Agarwal & Others of Alankit Group. Admittedly the alleged escaped income does not exceeds Rs.50,00,000/- and the satisfaction note of non-searched person was recorded on 24.06.2022. Therefore, the relevant search assessment year happens to be AY; 2023-24 by this yardstick 6 years period as referred in Section 153C(1) of the Act would be from AY: 2017-18 to AY: 2023-24. While the present assessment year fall beyond the block of 6 years.

P a g e | Subodh Kumar Sahay HUF (AY: 2014-15) 3. The law as stands settled by decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Jasjit Singh (2023) 458 ITR 423 (SC) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 612 (Del) and PCIT (Central-1) Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del) is that the date of reckoning of calculating 6 assessment years for reopening post search assessment in case of Non searched person would be when the seized material was handed over to the assessing officer of the non-searched person or the recording of satisfaction note u/s 153C of the Act by concerned assessing officer of the searched person.

4.

In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the conclusion drawn by ld. CIT(A) requires no interference. The grounds have no substance the appeals of the department are accordingly dismissed.

More judgments on Section 153C

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →