IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘DEHRADUN/’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 40/DDN/2022 (A.Y 2006-07) I.T.A. No. 41/DDN/2022 (A.Y 2007-08)

M/s Sharda Exports Vs ACIT C/o. Sh. Jitenera Kumar Gupta Central Circle, Income Tax 219, Railway Road, Meerut- Office, 16-A, cross Road, 250001,Uttar Pradesh Dehradun PAN: AAYFS1694N Appellant Respondent I.T.A. No. 44/DDN/2022 (A.Y 2006-07) I.T.A. No. 45/DDN/2022 (A.Y 2007-08)

ACIT Vs M/s Sharda Exports Central Circle, Income Tax C/o. Sh. Jitenera Kumar Office, 16-A, cross Road, Gupta 219, Railway Road, Dehradun Meerut-250001, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AAYFS1694N Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Rajkumar, CA & Sh. J. P. Sharma, CA Revenue by Sh. S. K. Chatterjee, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The Assessee as well as the Revenue preferred the captioned Appeals aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 27/04/2022 for A.Y 2006-

07 and 2007-08 respectively.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee furnished return of income for both the Assessment Years under consideration declaring NIL income. The return filed by the Assessee was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short). Subsequently a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and assessments were completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 08/06/2007 for Assessment Year 2006-07 and on 30/07/2009 for Assessment Year 2007-08 on total income of NIL. Subsequently, a notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued on the Assessee on 05/06/2012 for both the Assessment Years under consideration. The assessment orders came to be passed on 29/09/2021 u/s 147/143(3) of the Act by making certain additions in both the Assessment Years. Aggrieved by the assessment orders dated 29/09/2021, the Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide orders dated 27/04/2022 partly allowed the Appeals of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27/04/2022, both assessee as well as the Revenue questioned the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted at the outset that the notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued beyond four years form the end of Financial Year relevant to Assessment Year. Further submitted that, the A.O. can apply the provisions of Section 147 of the Act only if there is ‘any failure on the part of the Assessee to make full and true disclosure of all material fact that are relevant for the purpose of the assessment’. The Ld. Assessee's Representative drawn our attention to the Assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2005-06 in ITA No. 39/DDN/2022 and 43/DDN/2022, wherein in an identical facts,the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 15/09/2023, quashed the assessment for invalid assumption of jurisdiction. Thus, relying on the Assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2005-

06(supra),sought for quashing the subject assessment orders.

4. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the A.O. has passed the assessment orders strictly in accordance with law, therefore, there is no requirement of interference in the order of the Ld. CIT(A)by the Tribunal. Thus, sought for dismissal of the Ground of Appeal of the Assessee on invalid assumption of the jurisdiction by the A.O.

5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the reasons recorded placed in the paper books, it is found that nowhere the Ld. A.O. whispered about ‘failure on the part of the Assessee on disclosed fully and truly all material facts that are relevant for the purpose’. Admittedly in both the cases, the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 05/06/2012 which is after expiry of four years from the end of relevant Assessment Year. Therefore, first proviso to Section 147 of the Act comes into opera