Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals arise from section 153C assessments for assessment years 2017-18 to 2020-21, initiated following a search in the Alankit group on 18.10.2019. The Revenue contended that incriminating documents found pertained to the assessee and led to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessments were not sustainable as the Assessing Officer's satisfaction was based on seized material pertaining to assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, not the assessment years under appeal (2017-18 to 2020-21).
Key Issues
Validity of section 153C assessments due to lack of valid satisfaction recorded by departmental authorities based on seized material relevant to the assessment years.
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: ‘C’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Date of hearing 30.09.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.09.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s four appeals to 862/Del/2025 for assessment years 2017-18 to 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s-25 separate orders, all dated 18.12.2024, having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1071346050(1), ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25/1071346264(1), ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1071346551(1) and ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1071346658(1) involving proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
We notice at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that there arises the first and foremost legal issue of validity of the impugned section 153C assessments itself for want of a valid satisfaction recorded by the learned departmental authorities.
A combined perusal of all these case files reveals that the search herein dated 18.10.2019 had been carried out in M/s. Alankit group. The Revenue’s vehement contention before us is that since they had come across various incriminating documents and evidence, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of the searched party i.e. DCIT, Central Circle-28; New Delhi recorded his satisfaction that the same related or pertained to the assessee as representing various accommodation entries etc. All this followed the assessee’s
2 | P a g e Assessing Officer’s latter satisfaction recorded on 11.10.2022 so as to initiate the impugned proceedings which finally culminated in section 153C assessments under challenge before us. Learned CIT(DR)’s case, therefore, is that we ought to uphold the impugned twin satisfactions as the same has been recorded strictly in tune with the provisions of the Act only.