PREM ARORA,DELHI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, DELHI

CO 79/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax against Prem Arora, challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) pertaining to the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary legal issue was the validity of the assessment order passed under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was contested on the grounds that it was issued beyond the permissible time limit of 10 years from the date of recording satisfaction. The Tribunal referenced a similar case involving the Assessee's wife, where a Co-ordinate Bench had set aside the assessment order on the same grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773831 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT-7 Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 612 (Del), PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd., (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del), CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh (2024) 465 ITR 101 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Section 153C of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POOJA SWAROOP
• Assessee Lawyers: VED JAIN; UMA UPADHYAY
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 540/Del/2025 an 79/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Prem Arora IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 540/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Room No. 245, 2nd Floor, E-2, Block, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi Vs Prem Arora M-75, Greater Kailash, Part-1, South Delhi, Delhi PAN: ADPPA7189L Appellant Respondent C.O No. 79/DEL/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 540/Del/2025) Prem Arora M-75, Greater Kailash, Part-1, South Delhi, Delhi PAN: ADPPA7189L Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Room No. 245, 2nd Floor, E-2, Block, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ved Jain, Adv and Ms.Uma Upadhyay, CA Revenue by Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal and Cross Objection are filed by the Revenue and the Assessee respectively challenging the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 13/11/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee at the outset submitted that the assessment year involved in the Appeal is beyond the maximum time Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 540/Del/2025 an 79/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Prem Arora period of 10 Assessment Years from the date of recording satisfaction under Section 153C of the Act. Therefore, submitted that the assessment order passed by the A.O. is beyond the jurisdictionand liable to be set aside. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in the case of Assessee’s wife Smt. Geeta in ITA No. 401/Del/2025 connected with C.O. No. 80/Del/2025 (Assessment Year 2011-12), the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 13/08/2025,set aside the assessment order on the said ground, therefore, sought for allowing the present Appeal. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Assessee has challenged the validity of passing the impugned assessment order itself. In the present case, a search has been carried out on 02/11/2017 at the premises of Sh. Rakesh Jain, the A.O. of the search person has recorded his satisfactions on 16/07/2021 and handed over the relevant seized material to the A.O. of the other person i.e. the Assessee. Subsequently satisfaction has been recorded on 01/02/2022 in Assessee’s case. An assessment order came to be passed on 29/12/2022 u/s 153C r.w. Section 144 of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 540/Del/2025 an 79/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Prem Arora 5. It is not in dispute that the assessment year involved herein is 2011-12, which is beyond the maximum period of 10 years from the date of the satisfaction recorded by the A.O. of the Assessee u/s 153C of the Act which is relevant to Assessment Year 2022-23. 6. In an identical case of Assessee’s wife in ITA No. 401/Del/2025 connected with CO No. 80/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 13/08/2025 held as under:- “2. We first of all note that there arises the former legal issue of validity of the impugned assessment itself herein as the learned departmental authorities had carried out the search in question on 02.11.2017 followed by initiation of section 153C notice issued to the assessee on 01.02.2022 culminating in the impugned assessment framed in her case on 29.12.2022. 3. This being the clinching factual position, learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that the assessment year involved herein is 2011-12 i.e. beyond the maximum time period of 10 assessment years from the date of section 153C satisfaction i.e. 01.02.2022 relevant to assessment year 2022-23. Various recent judicial precedents CIT-7 Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 612 (Del), PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd., (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del) and CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh (2024) 465 ITR 101 (SC) have already settled the issue against the department that the date of satisfaction u/s 153C(1) first proviso which has to be construed as the date of search for the purpose of computing the corresponding assessment years in question as the case herein. We thus hold the impugned assessment dated 29.12.2022 as not sustainable in law in very terms.” Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 540/Del/2025 an 79/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Prem Arora 7. Considering the fact that the Assessment Year under consideration is beyond the maximum time period of 10 Assessment Years from the date of the satisfaction recorded u/s 153C of the Act, we find no reason to sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in setting aside the assessment order. 8. In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 9. Since we have dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue, the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee becomes in-fructuous. Accordingly, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th September, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 26 .09.2025 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 5 ITA No. 540/Del/2025 an 79/Del/2025 DCIT Vs. Prem Arora Printed from counselvise.com "