Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals) which deleted additions made under Section 69A and Section 69C. The assessee contended that the proceedings initiated under Section 153C for AY 2012-13 were barred by limitation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessment year 2012-13 falls beyond the period of 10 years for block assessment proceedings under Section 153C read with Section 153A, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed.
Key Issues
Whether proceedings under Section 153C for AY 2012-13 are barred by limitation due to being outside the 10-year block period.
Sections Cited
69A, 69C, 153C, 153A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA
Shri Jitender Singh, Sr. DR Revenue by Assessee by Shri Mayank Patawari, Adv. सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 11.08.2025 24.09.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.
This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-25, Delhi dated 23.12.2024 for the AY 2012-13. The Revenue has raised the following grounds:
1. “Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.35,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act.
2. Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,05,000/- made on account of unaccounted commission u/s 69C @3% of Rs.35,00,000/-.
Whether the computation of the block period under sections 153C and 153A of the Income Tax Act, as interpreted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd., aligns with the legislative intent and procedural flexibility outlined in CBDT Circular No. 2/2018 dated 15 February 2018.
That the order of the CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law.
5. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.”
2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the proceedings initiated u/s 153C for the assessment year under consideration i.e. AY 2012-13 is barred by limitation since in the instant assessment year falls beyond the period of ten years in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jasjit Singh (2023) SCC Online SC 1265 and the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) SCC Online Del 2439. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court held that the assessment year under consideration i.e. 2012-13 would fall beyond the ambit of 10 assessment years provided u/s 153C r.w.s.
153A of the Act and the impugned assessment order passed u/s 153C is quashed.
3. Heard rival contentions. We observed that the Ld. CIT(A) following the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that the AY 2012-13 would fall beyond the period of 10 years block given the facts of the assessee and accordingly the assessment was quashed observing as under:
4. On careful perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in holding that the assessment year under consideration i.e. AY 2012-13 is beyond the period of block of 10 years and therefore the assessment made for the AY 2012-13 pursue to notice u/s 153C has no legs to stand in view of the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Thus, we sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and reject the grounds raised by the Revenue.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24.09.2025