DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. PRITAM SINGH TALWAR, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 614/DEL/2025Status: HeardITAT Delhi24 December 2025AY 2021-22Bench: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no merits in the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s observation that the assessment year was beyond the six-year block period as per Section 153C read with Section 153A of the Act.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) who had allowed the appeal of the assessee by relying on Supreme Court and High Court judgments. The CIT(A) held that the assessment year in question was not covered within the block period for assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment year falls within the block period for making an assessment under Section 153C read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, DELHI

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

For Appellant: CA & Sh. Pritam Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. PoojaSwaroop, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 23/12/2025Pronounced: 24/12/2025

Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Anil Jain, CA & Sh. Pritam Kumar, Adv Revenue by Ms. PoojaSwaroop, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 23/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 24/12/2025 ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 Delhi, (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), dated 20/11/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2021-22.

2.

In the present appeal, Revenue challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 20/11/2024 wherein the ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-14 Vs. Jagjit Singh (2023) 458 ITR 437 and the Judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del.)allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 20/11/2024, Revenue preferred the captioned appeal.

3.

The ld. DR relying on the assessment order, sought for allowing the appeal.

4.

It is found that the ld. CIT(A) while setting aside the assessment order observed that the year under consideration is not covered within the six assessment years block period for the purpose of making assessment as per section 153C of the Act and by following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagjit Singh (supra) and the Judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (surpa), held that the assessment year under consideration would fall beyond the ambit of six years provided u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act. Accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

Considering the above facts and circumstances, since there is no contrary judgment or differentiable facts brought on record by the department, we find no merits in the grounds of appeal of the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as devoid of merits.

6.

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is 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 →