Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed eight appeals against the CIT(A)'s orders for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2020-21, which arose from protective assessments framed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a search action. Both the lower authorities made protective additions, and the corresponding substantive assessments are still pending before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal observed that the protective assessments should await the final outcome of the substantive appeals pending before the CIT(A) to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and contradictory findings. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the assessee's appeals back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after the final outcome of the corresponding substantive assessments.
Key Issues
Whether protective assessments framed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) should be adjudicated when the corresponding substantive assessments are still pending before the CIT(A).
Sections Cited
153C, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Asstt. Year : 2018-19 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Sh. Sandeep, Vs DCIT, H. No. 172, Village Amipur, Central Circle-27, Faridabad, Haryana-121101 New Delhi-110055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BRZPS1335M Assessee by : Sh. S. S. Nagar, CA Revenue by : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 22.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.12.2025 ORDER Per Bench: These assessee’s eight appeals to 3952/Del/2025, for A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2020-21, arise against the CIT(A)-31, Delhi’s in DIN & order Nos. TIBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1074808468(1), 1074810935(1), 1074806874(1), 1074809950(1), 1074807482(1), 1074809226(1), 1074811935(1) and 1074812314(1) all dated 21.03.2025 in proceedings u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
We notice at the outset during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant herein is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ action inter alia framing section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) assessments dated 30.03.2023, in furtherance to the search action dated 16.10.2019 in Navin Mahipal group of cases etc.
That being the case, learned CIT-DR vehemently supports all the impugned assessments on legality as well as on merits wherein both the lower authorities have made protective additions under various heads involving varying sums. He quotes Lalji Haridas Vs. ITO (1961) 43 ITR 387 (SC) to buttress the point that as and when there arises the doubt in the learned assessing authority’s mind as to in whose hands a particular head of income is to be assessed, it could indeed frame such a “protective” assessment to safeguard the Revenue’s interest.
Learned counsel representing assessee on the other hand seeks to raise various legal arguments inter alia going to root of the matter i.e. alleged improper recording of section 153C satisfaction and other related issues. The fact however remains that the corresponding “substantive” assessments are still stated to be pending before the learned CIT(A) as fairly to 3952/Del/2025 Sandeep informed by both the parties. We therefore deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to observe that all these “protective” assessments must await the final outcome of the substantive appeals which are pending before the learned CIT(A) in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and mutually contradictory findings; as the case may be. We thus deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeals back to the learned CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication after awaiting the final outcome of the corresponding substantive assessments; as per law. Ordered accordingly.
All other legal issues as well as those on merits between the parties are kept open at this stage.