SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 25598

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH)
G S AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED DELHI – Appellant
Versus
DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-6 DELHI DELHI – Respondent
ITA 4289/DEL/2025[2015-16]



##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

and

SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.4289/DEL/2025

(Assessment Year: 2015-16)

G.S. Automobiles Private Limited, vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6,

B – 26, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase II, Delhi.

Delhi – 110 020.

(PAN : AADCG1150B)

(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

ASSESSEE BY : Shri Neeraj Mangla, CA

REVENUE BY : Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Date of Hearing : 19.11.2025

Date of Order : 30.12.2025

O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi – 24 [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for

short] dated 19.06.2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16 raising

following grounds of appeal :-

“1. That the orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153C of the Act as well as

appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A) are bad in law and are passed in

contravention of prevailing law as well as facts of the case, therefore liable to

be annulled.

2. That assumption of jurisdiction of Ld. AO in consequence of order

passed by Ld. PCIT u/s 127(3) of the Act of the Act is illegal and not tenable

under the law because of said order being mechanical and being passed

##PAGE2##

2

ITA No.4289/DEL/2025

without recording reasons for transfer of case of assessee which was

mandatory pre-condition specified as per the provisions of See.. 127(2)(a) of

the Act.

3. That the assessment proceedings undertaken in case of assessee by Ld.

AO u/s 153C of the Act are illegal and not tenable under the law because

recording of consolidated satisfaction note for A.Y. 2011-12 to A.Y. 2017-18.

4. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in

assessing repaid loan of Rs. 50,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of

the Act.

5. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in

assessing loan of Rs. 50,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act

despite discharge of onus cast upon assessee to substantiate genuineness of the

same.

6. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in making

addition of Rs.1,50,000/- u/s 69C of the Act.

7. That Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in not

adjudicating objections to satisfaction' note filed by assessee company during

assessment proceedings.

8. That Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in holding the

assessee company to be "such other person" as defined u/s 153C of the Act.

9. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in making

additions to income of assessee relying on statements and evidences which

were not provided to assessee for rebuttal during assessment proceedings.

10. That the assessment order passed u/s 153C of the Act is further not

sustainable under the law as no opportunity of cross examination of persons

whose statements were relied upon was allowed.

11. That the assessment order passed by Ld. AO is further not sustainable

under the law because of getting and granting of proper approval u/s 153D of

the Act.

2. At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee stressed for ground no.3 and

submitted that the assessment proceedings undertaken in case of assessee

by AO under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the

Act’) are illegal and not tenable under the law because of recording of

##PAGE3##

3

ITA No.4289/DEL/2025

consolidated satisfaction note for A.Y. 2011-12 to A.Y. 2017-18. He

submitted that the consolidated satisfaction note for AYs 2011-12 to

2017-18 was recorded by the Assessing Officer for proceedings u/s 153C

of the Act at pages 3 to 5 of the assessment order. He further submitted

that from the perusal of said satisfaction note, it is evident that Assessing

Officer failed to demonstrate live and direct nexus between the seized

material and relevant assessment year and even quantum of alleged

undisclosed income was not mentioned in the satisfaction note. He

pleaded that the assessment proceedings initiated u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3)

be quashed on this ground alone and in this

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top