Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed an appeal and the Assessee filed a Cross Objection challenging an order related to Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessee argued that the assessment order was time-barred as it was passed beyond the maximum period of 10 years from the date of recording satisfaction under Section 153C of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessment year in question was beyond the maximum time period of 10 years from the date of satisfaction recorded under Section 153C of the Act. This was in line with previous decisions concerning identical facts.
Key Issues
Whether an assessment order passed under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act is valid if the assessment year falls beyond the prescribed time limit of 10 years from the date of satisfaction recorded by the AO.
Sections Cited
153C, 144
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
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
1. The present appeal and Cross Objection are filed by the Revenue and the Assessee respectively challenging the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 13/11/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee at the outset submitted that the assessment year involved in the Appeal is beyond the maximum time under Section 153C of the Act. Therefore, submitted that the assessment order passed by the A.O. is beyond the jurisdictionand liable to be set aside. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in the case of Assessee’s wife Smt. Geeta in connected with C.O.
No. 80/Del/2025 (Assessment Year 2011-12), the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 13/08/2025,set aside the assessment order on the said ground, therefore, sought for allowing the present Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Assessee has challenged the validity of passing the impugned assessment order itself. In the present case, a search has been carried out on 02/11/2017 at the premises of Sh. Rakesh Jain, the A.O. of the search person has recorded his satisfactions on 16/07/2021 and handed over the relevant seized material to the A.O. of the other person i.e. the Assessee. Subsequently satisfaction has been recorded on 01/02/2022 in Assessee’s case. An assessment order came to be passed on 29/12/2022 u/s 153C r.w. Section 144 of the Act.
2011-12, which is beyond the maximum period of 10 years from the date of the satisfaction recorded by the A.O. of the Assessee u/s 153C of the Act which is relevant to Assessment Year 2022-23.
In an identical case of Assessee’s wife in connected with CO No. 80/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 13/08/2025 held as under:-
“2. We first of all note that there arises the former legal issue of validity of the impugned assessment itself herein as the learned departmental authorities had carried out the search in question on 02.11.2017 followed by initiation of section 153C notice issued to the assessee on 01.02.2022 culminating in the impugned assessment framed in her case on 29.12.2022.
3. This being the clinching factual position, learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that the assessment year involved herein is 2011-12 i.e. beyond the maximum time period of 10 assessment years from the date of section 153C satisfaction i.e. 01.02.2022 relevant to assessment year 2022-23. Various recent judicial precedents CIT-7 Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 612 (Del), PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd., (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del) and CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh (2024) 465 ITR 101 (SC) have already settled the issue against the department that the date of satisfaction u/s 153C(1) first proviso which has to be construed as the date of search for the purpose of computing the corresponding assessment years in question as the case herein. We thus hold the impugned assessment dated 29.12.2022 as not sustainable in law in very terms.” is beyond the maximum time period of 10 Assessment Years from the date of the satisfaction recorded u/s 153C of the Act, we find no reason to sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in setting aside the assessment order.
In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Since we have dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue, the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee becomes in-fructuous. Accordingly, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26th September, 2025