IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &

[Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2015-16 & 2017-18]

Shaan Realcon (P) Ltd. vs ACIT

2599/4, Beodan Pura Central Circle-II Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 Faridabad PAN-AALCS3794F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri S.S.Nagar, CA Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 27.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 23.04.2025 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM :

The captioned appeals have been filed at the instance of the assessee against the common and consolidated order, all dated 29.09.2023 passed by passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-3, Gurgaon [“CIT(A)”] concerning Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2015-16 & 2017-18 respectively arising from the respective assessment orders passed by the AO tabulated hereunder:-

Sr. ITA Nos. CIT(A) Order Assessment Assessment Order Nos. dated Order dated passed under section

1. 3514/Del/2023 CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon 18.12.2018 153A(1)(b) of the [AY 2011-12] order dated Income Tax Act, 1961

29.09.2023

2. 3515/Del/2023 -Do- -Do- -Do-

[AY 2012-13]

3. 3516/Del/2023 -Do- -Do- -Do-

[AY 2013-14]

4. 3517/Del/2023 -Do- -Do- -Do-

[AY 2014-15]

5. 3518/Del/2023 -Do- -Do- -Do-

[AY 2015-16]

6. 3519/Del/2023 -Do- -Do- 153B(1)(b) r.w.s.

[AY 2017-18] 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

2. Briefly stated, the assessee filed return of income for captioned assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16 & 2017-18 under s. 139(1) of the Act. A search and seizure operation under s. 132 of the Act was carried out on M3M Group of cases on 21.07.2016. Consequently, a ‘satisfaction note’ was prepared by the AO of the searched person under s.153C of the Act. Based on the receipt of documents etc. from the AO of the searched person, the AO of the third person i.e. the assessee herein also proceeded to draw ‘satisfaction note’

dated 25.09.2018 alleging undisclosed income.

3. Pursuant to the ‘satisfaction note’ prepared under s. 153C of the Act, the proceedings under s. 153C were set in motion by issuance of notice dated 26.09.2018 under s. 153C. In consequence of s. 153C proceedings, certain additions were made by the AO on estimated basis by applying the rate of 10% representing alleged income from commission on total credits and debits reflected in the bank statement of the assessee company.

4. Aggrieved by the additions made, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) restricted the additions to 1% of total amount of debit and credit entries appearing in the books instead of 10% estimated by AO.

5. Further aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.

6. When the matter was called for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee adverted to grounds of appeal and made wide ranging submissions on lack of jurisdiction assumed under s. 153C; assessment framed under s. 153C for AY 2011-12 & 2012-13 barred by limitation as well as arguments canvassed towards untenability of additions on merits.

7. Since the assessee has raised challenge to the very jurisdiction assumed under s. 153C of the Act by the AO, such preliminary issue requires to be dealt with at the threshold. The arguments raised on behalf of the assessee and the counter-arguments of the Revenue have been considered on the alleged lack of jurisdiction assumed under s. 153C of the Act.

8. The Ld. Counsel inter-alia pointed out that the ‘Satisfaction Note’ was drawn on 25.09.2018 and therefore, the year in which the satisfaction note was drawn stand substituted for the date of search for the purpose of limitation period contemplated under section 153C of the Act. The learned Counsel submitted that the relevant assessment year qua the satisfaction note is A.Y. 2018-19 and therefore, six years preceding such Assessment Year to which documents or assets seized requisitioned ends in A.Y. 2012-13. This being so, the A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 in question falls outside the limitation period of 6 years and thus is barred by limitation and henc