DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A), finding that the assessment order for the year in question was indeed beyond the 10-year period as per explanation 1 to Section 153A(1) of the Act. The Tribunal followed the binding precedent of the Jurisdictional High Court.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which allowed the assessee's appeal. The CIT(A) held that the assessment order for AY 2010-11 was beyond the extended 10-year period.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order for AY 2010-11 was time-barred under the 10-year limitation period prescribed by law.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The captioned appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25 (‘Ld. CIT (A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 28/02/2025 for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 24/05/2022 u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by challenging the assessment order dated 24/05/2022. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28/02/2025, allowed the appeal of the Assessee on the ground that the assessment so framed against the Assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11 is beyond the extended 10 year period.
Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 28/02/2025, the Department preferred the present Appeal. The Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the Department has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. and apart from the same, the additions have been made to recover the actual tax due from the Assessee on its merits, therefore, sought for interference by the Tribunal and prayed for allowing the present Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the assessment has been framed for the year under consideration which falls beyond the period of 10 years, therefore, the Judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. being binding precedent, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the Appeal of the Assessee. Thus, sought for dismissal of appeal filed by the Revenue.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) at Para 10.9 and 10.10 of the order impugned, calculated the period of 10 years in framing the assessment order for the year under consideration and found that the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2010-11 falls beyond the purview of 10 years in terms of explanation 1 to Section 153A(1) of the Act. Further, relying on the Judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra), set aside the assessment order. The Judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is having binding precedent, which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in setting aside the assessment order in question. In the absence of any contrary judicial precedent brought to the notice of the Bench and in the absence of any contrary factual aspects on record, we find no reason to interfere with the findings and the conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A).
Thus, we find no merits in the Ground of Appeal of the Revenue, accordingly, grounds of Appeal of the Revenue are dismissed.
In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05th December, 2025
More judgments on Section 153A(1)
- Deuty Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs Maharaja Agarsain Builders Private Limited…ITA 3797/DEL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Maharaja Agarsain Builders Private Limited…ITA 3796/DEL/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- DCIT Central Circle 7(2), Mumbai vs Jesus Sudhir Lall, MumbaiITA 9308/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
- Padma Logistics Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs DCIT, Central Circle-5, New DelhiITA 4938/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
- P R Kumar Capital Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central…ITA 5249/DEL/2025[2020-2021]Status: Disposed30 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026