DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28 NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. ANKUR GUPTA HUF, NEW DELHI

ITA 3627/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 December 2025AY 2015-16Bench: the Tribunal.3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the CIT(A)'s finding that the assessment for AY 2014-15 under Section 153C(1) was invalid. It held that the conditions for reopening beyond six years were not met, as the aggregate escaped income was below Rs. 50 lakhs, and more critically, AY 2014-15 was beyond the permissible six-year period from the date of the satisfaction note or handover of seized material to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s decision which had allowed the assessees' (Basheshar Dayal, Ankur Gupta, Anisha Gupta) appeals arising from a common search and seizure action. The CIT(A) had quashed assessments for AY 2014-15 (and other AYs via mutatis mutandis application) made under Section 153C(1), primarily on the grounds that the escaped income did not meet the Rs. 50 lakh threshold for extended reopening, and that AY 2014-15 fell outside the statutory six-year assessment period relevant to search cases.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in holding that AY 2014-15 falls outside the six-year block period for assessment under Section 153C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the conditions for reopening beyond six years (specifically the Rs. 50 lakh threshold) were met.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253(2),Section 153C(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ITA No. 3624, 3625/DEL/2025- DCIT CC vs Basheshar Dayal ITA No. 3626, 3627/DEL/2025- DCIT CC vs Ankur Gupta ITA No. 3628, 3629/DEL/2025- DCIT CC vs Anisha Gupta

PER RENU JAUHRI, AM:

1.

The above captioned appeals are filed by Revenue i.e., DCIT, CC-28, New Delhi, u/s 253(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, “Act”) before the Tribunal.

2.

Since all the appeals arise on account of the same search and seizure action in the group cases and facts as well as the issues are common in all the appeals, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order.

3.

We take revenue’s appeal in the case of Shri. Basheshar Dayal (A.Y. 2014-15), having ITA No. 3624/Del/2025, as the lead case. Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:

“ (i) Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in relying upon the judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT, Central-1, Delhi vs Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 52 of 2024), even when the Revenue has filed a SLP against this decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court?

(ii) Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in

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(1)

All 36 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →