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

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3 – Appellant
Versus
M/S PGF LTD. – Respondent
ITA-528/2019



Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/004827

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

ITA 528/2019

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing

Counsel.

versus

M/S PGF LTD.

..... Respondent

Through:

None.

Mr. Sachit Jolly, Amicus Curiae

+

ITA 529/2019

PR.COMMISSIONER OFLNCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing

Counsel.

versus

M/S PGF LTD.

..... Respondent

Through:

None.

Mr. Sachit Jolly, Ld. Amicus Curiae

+

ITA 530/2019

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing

Counsel.

versus

Digitally Signed By:JASWANT

SINGH RAWAT

Signing Date:15.11.2022

10:39:05

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/004827

M/S PGF LTD.

..... Respondent

Through:

None.

Mr. Sachit Jolly, Amicus Curiae

+

ITA 535/2019

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing

Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agrawal and

Mr. Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing

Counsel.

versus

M/S PGF LTD.

..... Respondent

Through :

None.

Mr. Sachit Jolly,. Amicus Curiae

Reserved On

: 18thOctober, 2022

%

Date of Decision: 14thNovember, 2022

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

J U D G M E N T

MANMOHAN, J:

1.

The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the Appellant-Revenue,

challenging the consolidated order dated 29thJune, 2018 passed by the

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘ITAT’) in ITA Nos.2131-

2134/Del/2010 for the Assessment Years 2000-01 to 2003-04, whereby the

ITAT has upheld separate Orders dated 10thFebruary, 2010 passed by the

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, New Delhi (for short CIT(A)

quashing the assessment order(s) dated 28thDecember, 2007 passed under

Digitally Signed By:JASWANT

SINGH RAWAT

Signing Date:15.11.2022

10:39:05

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/004827

Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act, 1961’) for

the respective Assessment Years pursuant to the search carried out on 22nd

September, 2005 at the premises of the Respondent-Assessee under Section

132 of the Act, 1961.

2.

Both the appellate authorities, viz., CIT(Appeal) and the ITAT have

returned concurrent findings of fact that no incriminating material was

found during the search conducted on 22ndSeptember, 2005 warranting

assessment under Section 153A of the Act, 1961.

3.

The appeals and questions of law, as formulated by the Appellant–

Revenue are premised on the submission that it is not necessary that

incriminating material is found during search under Section 132 of the Act,

1961 for an order under Section 153A of the Act, 1961 to be passed even

where original assessments have attained finality and have not abated. The

questions of law as suggested in one of the appeal being ITA 527/2019 are

reproduced hereinbelow:-

Digitally Signed By:JASWANT

SINGH RAWAT

Signing Date:15.11.2022

10:39:05

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number: 2022/DHC/004827

4.

By way of separate applications bearing CM Nos.49886-49889 of

2019, the Appellant Revenue has filed judgments of the Supreme Court of

India in PGF Ltd. v. UOI [2015] 13 SCC 50 and Punjab & Haryana High

Court in PGF v. UOI [2004] SCC Online P&H 676 and proposed two

further questions of law on the basis of findings of the High Court and

Supreme Court wherein the sale and purchase of agricultural land by the

Respondent-Assessee have been held by Courts to bogus/sham/paper

transactions.

5.

During the course of hearing before this Court, the learned Senior

Standing Counsel for the Revenue had argued that the statement recorded

during the course of search under Section 132(4) of the Act, 1961 can be

Digitally Signed By:JASWANT

SINGH RAWAT

Signing Date:15.11.2022

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top