M/S. AG POLYPACKS PVT. LTD. (AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF MIDAS POLYPACK PVT. LTD.),DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI, DELHI

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

These assessee’s four appeals ITA Nos. 859 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/
Assessee by Sh. Vibhu Gupta, Adv.
Department by Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
30.09.2025
Date of pronouncement
30.09.2025

ITA No.859 to 862/Del/2025
2 | P a g e

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.
2. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
3. 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.
4. 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 juri ictional 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

ITA No.859 to 862/Del/2025
3 | 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.
5. We find no reason to accept the Revenue’s foregoing contention. This is for the precise reason that the impugned assessment years before us are 2017-18 to 2020-21, whereas, both the aforesaid Assessing Officer’s respective satisfactions had taken note of the alleged seized material against the assessee in assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 only. This being the clinching factual position, we are of the considered view that the impugned assessments framed for these four assessment years
2017-18 to 2020-21 could not be held sustainable in law for want of incriminating/seized material as per (2025) 170 taxmann.com
664 (SC), PCIT Vs. Dev Technofab Ltd. upholding hon’ble juri ictional high court’s judgment reported as (2024) 166
taxmann.com 514 (Del). All these four impugned assessments are ITA No.859 to 862/Del/2025
4 | P a g e hereby quashed as non-est in the eyes of law therefore. Ordered accordingly.

All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.
6. These assessee’s four appeals ITA Nos.859 to 862/Del/2025
are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th September, 2025 (MANISH AGARWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 17th October, 2025. RK/-