NIRMAL KUMAR MINDA,GURUGRAM V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 13, NEW DELHI

ITA 2025/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Nirmal Kumar Minda against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi, which arose from an assessment order passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-13, Delhi. The assessment was based on searches conducted on the Minda group and related to multiple assessment years. The primary legal issue was the validity of the satisfaction note recorded under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is a prerequisite for initiating proceedings against a person other than the one searched. The tribunal examined whether the satisfaction note was properly recorded and whether the correct jurisdictional officer had issued the notice under section 153C.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126202 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: Ojjus Medicare Pvt Ltd [2024] 61 taxmann.com 160 (Del)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJINDER KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: PRADEEP DINODIA
• Keywords: Block assessment; Satisfaction; Commissioner; 153C; AY 2010-11; AY 2011-12
• Section: 143(3); 153; 153C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2025/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmal Kumar Minda, J-10/33, Purvi Marg, DLF QE S.O., Sikanderpur Ghosi, Gurugram, Haryana – 122 002. PAN: AFYPM4910J Vs DCIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CA; Shri R.K. Kapoor, CA; & Shri Harish Dhameja, CA Revenue by : Ms Rajinder Kaur, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 18.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.04.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.05.2023 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in Appeal No.26/10039/2009-10 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 11.06.2021 passed u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, ITA No.2025/Del/2023 2 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Central Circle-13, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. On hearing both the sides, we find that that the assessee is an individual and there were two searches conducted on the assessee i.e., Minda group and block assessment period consisting of AY 2006-07 to AY 2012-13 were completed based on the first search in March, 2014 and again for the block period comprising AY 2012-13 to 2017-18 based on the second search on 18.06.2017 for which assessments were completed in December, 2019. In regard to the impugned assessment order, we find that the same has been passed u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act and the Assessing Officer mentions that the satisfaction note u/s 153C was issued on 05.03.2021 and served upon the assessee in response to which the assessee had filed return of income on 18.02.2021. Subsequently, assessment was completed. 3. The case of the assessee as casted by the ld. counsel is that no such satisfaction was recorded. The ld. counsel has placed before us a communication dated 07.05.2024 made by the assessee with the Assessing Officer wherein the copies of satisfaction notes were required. The ld. counsel has submitted that only a satisfaction note dated 11.03.2020 has been provided which is consequent to search dated 05.10.2017. We find that this is the common satisfaction note recorded for AY 2010-11 to 2018-19. This satisfaction note does not speak of the document which were relating to the ITA No.2025/Del/2023 3 assessee and received from the assessing officer of JBM group or the name of the jurisdictional assessing officer who recorded the satisfaction note. 4. We find substance in the contention of the ld. counsel that quite likely the satisfaction note was recorded on 11.03.2020 but first notice to the assessee u/s 153C of the Act was issued on 03.02.2021, as has been mentioned in the assessment order also. There is no dispute to the proposition of law that as per section 153C(1) satisfaction note is required to be first recorded by the AO having jurisdiction u/s 153 of the Act upon searched person who, in the present case, admittedly, is JBM group. Thus, without there being no satisfaction note of the searched person, the issuance of notice u/s 153C of the Act is tainted assumption of jurisdiction. 5. Even otherwise, the ld. counsel has been able to establish that even if it is assumed that the satisfaction was recorded on 11.03.2020, then, the relevant block assessment years would be from AY 2011-12 to AY 2020-21 and the present assessment year AY 2010-11 shall not fall within the block of ten assessment years. At the same time, if the satisfaction note is considered for 02.02.2021, then, in that case, the block assessment period would be 2012-13 to 2021-22 and again, the present assessment year 2010-11 shall not fall within the block of ten assessment years and, thus, in the light of the now settled law by the judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicare Pvt Ltd [2024] 61 taxmann.com 160 (Del), the assessment order cannot be sustained. ITA No.2025/Del/2023 4 6. As a consequence of the aforesaid discussion, we are inclined to sustain the ground No.1. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. The impugned assessment is quashed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23. 04.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:23rd April, 2025. dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "