DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI V. ARUN GUPTA, NEW DELHI

ITA 3683/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-28, New Delhi against Arun Gupta concerning the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The primary legal issue was whether the assessments for the specified years were valid under the block assessment provisions of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue argued for the validity of the assessments, while the respondent highlighted that the assessments were made beyond the permissible block period of 10 years, referencing a related case involving M/s Transline Technologies Ltd. The Tribunal, referencing the decision in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd., found that the assessments were indeed beyond the block period and thus invalid.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790619 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2025
• Other Referred Cases: DCIT Vs. M/s Transline Technologies Ltd., Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: CHINU BHASIN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 3683 & 3684/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Arun Gupta IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3683/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2011-12) ITA No. 3684/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-28 New Delhi Vs Arun Gupta Room No. 327, 3rd Floor, ARA Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi PAN: ADXPG9160B Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Chinu Bhasin, Adv Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing 02/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeals are filed by the Revenue against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25 (‘Ld. CIT (A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 28/02/2025for the Assessment Year 2011-12 & 2012- 13 respectively. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the A.O. made protective addition in the hands of the Assessee and substantive addition has been made in the hands of M/s Transline Technologies Ltd. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 3683 & 3684/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Arun Gupta the case of DCIT Vs. M/s Transline Technologies Ltd. in ITA No. 3693/Del/2025 and the other connected matters vide order dated 07/11/2025, held that the assessment years under consideration therein i.e. Assessment Year 2011-12 to 2012-13 are beyond the period of 10 years and accordingly, set aside the assessment orders therein by following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2024) 161 taxmann. Com 160 Delhi dated 03/04/2024. Therefore, submitted that the ratio laid down in the case of Ojjus Medicare (supra) and by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Transline Technologies Ltd. (supra), squarely applicable, thus sought for dismissal of the Appeals of the Revenue. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the assessment orders, sought for allowing the Appeals. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Transline Technologies Ltd. (supra), while declaring the assessment years under consideration thereon are beyond the block period of 10 years, wherein substantial addition has been made, by following the ratio laid down in the case of Ojjus Medicare (supra), held as under:- Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 3683 & 3684/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Arun Gupta \"The law as interpreted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court as above, declares that as per provisions of section 153C of the Act, deemed to be the date of receipt of books of account/materials/asset, the commencement date for computation of the six/ten assessment years is belonging/pertaining to non-searched person, by the jurisdictional recording of the satisfaction u/s 153C in the case of the non-searched person Assessing Officer of the non- searched person. In other words, date of becomes date of search in the case of nonsearched person the assessee in the present case]. In the instant case of the assessee (non-searched person), as the satisfaction i.e. 17/02/20222. In light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Delhi High Court [supra], the impugned A.Y 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 would, therefore, fall beyond the period of six/ten assessment years as reckoned with reference to the date of recording of satisfaction by the assessing officer of the non-searched person. We therefore, have no hesitation in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) and quashing the impugned assessment order having been made without legal and valid assumption of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the assessment of the A.Ys under consideration for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 are considered as beyond the block period of 10 assessment years and hence invalid.\" 5. In view of the above, since there is no change of circumstances, by following the ratio laid down in the case of Ojjus Medicare (supra), the assessment years under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2011-12 and 2012-13 are being beyond block period of 10 Assessment Years, the same cannot be held to be valid. Finding no merits in the grounds of appeal of the Revenue, the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue are dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 3683 & 3684/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Arun Gupta 6. In the result Appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos. 3683/Del/2025 and 3684/Del/2025 are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th December, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 05.12.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "