Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arose from proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer had passed an assessment order on 18.11.2019, but another assessment was framed on 29.09.2021 in a search case conducted on 16.10.2019.
Held
The Tribunal held that the impugned assessment was pending as on the date of the search on 16.10.2013 and thus had to be mandatorily abated in light of Section 153A(1) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the assessment was quashed as non-est in the eyes of law.
Key Issues
Whether an assessment order passed subsequent to a search, for a period pending at the time of search, is liable to be abated and quashed under Section 153A(1) of the Income Tax Act?
Sections Cited
147, 144, 153A(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ramesh Kumar Goyal, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Associates Ward-2(1), L-7A(LGF), South Extension, Faridabad, Part-II, New Delhi-110049 Haryana-121001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ANFPG9814N Assessee by: Sh. Rajkumar Gupta, CA & Sh. J. P. Sharma, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069720509(1) dated 17.10.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
Delay of one day in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC is hereby condoned in the larger interest of justice and in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
Ramesh Kumar Goyal 4. Next comes the first and foremost legal issue between the parties. There is no dispute that the learned Assessing Officer had passed his assessment order on 18.11.2019. Learned counsel on the other hand has invited the tribunal’s attention to the Assessing Officer’s yet another assessment framed on 29.09.2021 in a search case which was carried out on 16.10.2019. It is thus clear that the impugned assessment was indeed pending as on the date of search on 16.10.2013 which had to be mandatorily abated in light of section 153A(1) r.w. 2nd proviso thereto; and, therefore, the same has to be quashed as non-est in the eyes of law in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic.