DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI V. SOM PRAKASH SETHI, DELHI

ITA 4470/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax against Som Prakash Sethi concerning the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2014-15. Initially, the Assessing Officer assessed the income of Som Prakash Sethi significantly higher than the loss declared in his return, leading to an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) reversed the assessment, citing precedents that the assessment year in question did not fall within the block of assessment years applicable for the search conducted in 2016. The Department of Revenue challenged this decision, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 23012 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: RRJ Securities, 380-ITR 612 (Del), Jagjit Singh 2023 SCC Online SC1265
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYA CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Block assessment
• Section: 139; 153C

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 4470/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Som Prakash Sethi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4470/DEL/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 344, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi Vs. Som Prakash Sethi S-521, GK-2, New Delhi PAN: ABYPS3902L Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 27/02/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, [‘Ld. CIT’ for short] dated 31/07/2024 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. None appeared for the Assessee. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an order u/s 153C of the Act has been passed by the A.O. on 30/12/2022 by assessing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 7,29,64,600/- as against the total loss declared in return 2 ITA No. 4470/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Som Prakash Sethi of income filed u/s 139 of the Act of Rs. 3,06,86,730/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 31/07/2024, allowed the Appeal of the Assessee by following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of RRJ Securities, 380-ITR 612 (Del) and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagjit Singh 2023 SCC Online SC1265 held thatthe assessment order under consideration is not covered within 6 block Assessment Years. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 31/07/2024, the Department of Revenue preferred the presentAppeal. 4. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, relied on the order of the A.O., however, fairly submitted that the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2014-15, will not come under the block Assessment Years as the search has been carried out on 22/02/2016 and the satisfaction recorded by the A.O. of the Assessee on 09/02/2022 which being the deemed date of search for the purpose of initiation of the assessment underSection 153C(1) of the Act. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Assessee's Representative relying on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 3 ITA No. 4470/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Som Prakash Sethi 6. We have heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. In the present case, the satisfaction has been recorded by the A.O. of the Assessee on 09/02/2022 and the search year for the Assessee would be 2022-23 and the block six years for the assessment u/s 153C would be Assessment Year 2016-17 to 2021-22. Therefore, the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2014-15 will not come under the block Assessment Years. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) committed no error in deleting the addition by relying on the ratio laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of RRJ Securities (supra) and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jagjit Singh (supra). Thus finding no merits in the Grounds of appeal of the Revenue, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th February, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 27 .02.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* 4 ITA No. 4470/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Som Prakash Sethi Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "