INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2011-12 to 2018-19)

DCIT, Vs. Udai Shanker Awasthi, Central Circle-1, L-4, Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

PAN: AAAPA3909L Assessee by : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA Ms. Rinky Sharma, ITP Shri Anmol Jha, Adv Revenue by: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT (DR)

Date of Hearing 06/01/2025 Date of pronouncement /02/2026 O R D E R PER BENCH

1. These are the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos. 4649, 4691 & 5343 to 5347/Del/2025 for AYs 2011-12 to 2018-19, arises out of the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. CIT(A)‟, in short] dated 07-05-2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 31-03-2023 by the Assessing Officer, Dy/ ACIT, Circle-1, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

2. Both the parties mutually agreed that the assessments framed for the Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13 by the Learned AO would be outside the block period of 6 years and in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs Ojjus Medicare Pvt Ltd reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Del HC). Let us now see how the aforesaid decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court would apply to the facts of the instant case before us for the Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13. A search and seizure operation was carried out u/s 132 of the Act on Shri Rajeev Saxena and Shri Sanjay Jain on 30-06-2019 wherein, many incriminating documents / information were found by the Revenue based on which necessary satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act was recorded on 29-09-2021 by the Learned AO of the assessee on receipt of a satisfaction note dated 25- 09-2021 from the AO of Shri Rajiv Saxena. Thereafter, notices u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act were issued to the assessee on that very date for the 10 AYs 2011-12 to 2020-21. Hence, the date of search qua the assessee herein would be the date of recording of satisfaction note by the Learned AO of the assessee which is 29-09-2021 which falls in Assessment Year 2022-23. Hence applying the ratio decidendi of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court referred supra, the 10 Assessment Years would be as under:-

Computation of ten year block period as No of Years Provided u/s 153C r.w.s 153A AY 2022-23 1 AY 2021-22 2 AY 2020-21 3 AY 2019-20 4 AY 2018-19 5 AY 2017-18 6 AY 2016-17 7 AY 2015-16 8 AY 2014-15 9 AY 2013-14 10

3. Hence the search assessments framed for the Assessment Years 2011- 12 and 2012-13 would be outside the block period of 10 Assessment Years.

Hence the search assessments framed for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 had been rightly quashed by the Learned CIT(A), on which we do not find any infirmity. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue for these two assessment years are hereby dismissed.

4. As stated in earlier part of this order, the issues involved in all the assessment years are identical. Accordingly, the facts relevant for Assessment Year 2013-14 are taken up for adjudication and the decision rendered thereon shall apply mutatis mutandis for other assessment years also except with variance in figures.

5. The common issues raised by the revenue for the remaining Assessment Years are summarized as under:-

a) CIT(A) erred in quashing the assessment order without appreciating valid satisfaction recorded and statutory compliance.

b) CIT(A) wrongly held that no incriminating material was found, ignoring material evidence establishing undisclosed commission income routed through third parties.

c) CIT(A) ignored further corroboration provided by witness statements and cross-examination.

d) CIT(A) relied uncritically on the PJSC Uralkali le