DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. RAJESH KUMAR KALRA, DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection i.e.
and CO
No.
114/Del/2025
for Assessment Year 2013-14, arises against the CIT(A)-24, New
Delhi’s
DIN
&
order
No.
ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-
25/1073629429(1) dated 24.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It transpires at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the learned Assessing Officer’s CO No. 114/Del/2025 Rajesh Kumar Kalra
2
section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) assessment itself dated 26.03.2023
as quashed in the lower appellate discussion. This is for the precise reason that he has been himself very fair in making it clear at page 11 of the assessment order that no entry in the corresponding seized material alleged to be belonging to the assessee pertaining to the relevant financial year 2012-13 had been found or seized in the course of search. This clinching factual position has gone un-rebutted from the Revenue side.
Faced with this situation, learned CIT-DR vehemently argues that the Assessing Officer had indeed carried out detailed enquiries and investigation(s) whilst making the impugned addition(s) in the assessee’s hands. We find no merit in the Revenue’s arguments once it has come on record that the seized material pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17 nowhere indicated the assessee’s undisclosed income so as to trigger the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. Hon’ble juri ictional high court’s recent landmark decision in Saksham Commodities Ltd. v.ITO (2024) 464 ITR 1 (Del.) has further settled the issue in the assessee’s favour and against the department that such a satisfaction note recorded u/s 153C of the Act without indicating the relevant assessment year’s income liable to be assessed is not sustainable in law. We thus CO No. 114/Del/2025 Rajesh Kumar Kalra
3
find no reason to interfere with the learned CIT(A)’s detailed discussion quashing the impugned assessment. The Revenue fails in it’s instant appeal ITA No. 3607/Del/2025 therefore.
The assessee’s cross objection CO No. 114/Del/2025 is dismissed as rendered infructuous.
To sum up, this Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 3607/Del/2025 is dismissed and the assessee’s cross objection CO No. 114/Del/2025 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 04/12/2025. (Manish Agarwal) (Satbeer Singh Godara)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 05/01/2026
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*