VIVEK VISWANATHAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 450/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 November 2025AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment framed under section 143(3) was not sustainable in law as it ought to have been completed under section 153C. Therefore, the impugned assessment was quashed.

What were the facts?

Following a search action, the Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 143(2) and ultimately framed an assessment. The assessee contended that the assessment should have been framed under section 153C, not the general provisions of section 143(3). The AO's own remand report indicated the assessment was framed only under section 143(3).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether an assessment framed under section 143(3) was valid when the conditions for section 153C were met, following a search action.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 143(3),Section 143(2),Section 153D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 BENCH, ‘A’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Rastogi Adv
For Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 20.11.2025Pronounced: 28.11.2025

Date of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, [in short the “CIT(A)”], Noida’s order dated 05.12.2023 passed in Case No.

CIT(A), Kanpur-4/11079/2017-18, involving proceedings under section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused. foremost issue of the validity of ld. Assessing Officer’s assessment dated 10.09.2021 itself framed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

There is no dispute that the learned departmental authorities had conducted a search action in M/s Satyapal Gupta and Others group dated 30.11.2017 which made the Assessing Officer to issue section 143(2) notice finally culminating in the impugned assessment. Learned counsel therefore pleads in this factual backdrop that in the given facts, once the Assessing Officer had recorded his satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act on 26.09.2019, he ought to have framed his assessment only u/s 153C of the Act than that under the general provisions herein.

3.

The Revenue on the other hand vehemently submits that impugned assessment has been framed u/s 153C of the Act only since the prescribed authority had duly approved the same u/s 153D of the Act as per the assessment order before us.

4.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and Revenues foregoing contentions. A perusal of the case file records indicates that the learned Assessing authority had in fact filed its remand report dated 26.02.2023 (pages 38 to 40 of the paper book) before the CIT(A) wherein it has itself clarified that the assessment for the impugned assessment year have been framed only u/s 143(3) of the Act. This being the clinching factual position, we hereby quote the landmark judicial precedents i.e. PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd., (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del) and CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh (2024) 465 ITR 101 (SC) conclude that the impugned assessment framed u/s 143(3) is not sustainable in law for this precise reason that it ought to have been completed u/s 153C of the Act; the same stands quashed in very terms above.

All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.

5.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th November, 2025.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →