End Of Picture Text -----<Br> v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central

$~92 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 10848/2024 CM APPL. 44656/2024 ANUJ AGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. U. K. Gupta and Mr. Tarun, Advocates versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4, NEW DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC, Mr. Shivansh B. Pandya, Mr. Viplav Acharya, Ms. Priya Sarkar, JSCs and Mr. Utkarsh Tiwari, Advocates CORAM:HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIAO R D E R13.01.2025 % 1.Issue notice. 2.The learned counsel for the Revenue accepts notice. 3.The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a notice dated 22.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) in respect of Assessment Year (AY) 2013-2014. 4.The Petitionercontendsthat the said impugned notice was issued beyond the period of limitation. The impugned notice is premised on a search that was conducted on 20.07.2022. It is contended that the period of 10 years, which could be covered under Section 153A(1) as it was applicable at the material time, is required to be reckoned from the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the notice was issued, that is, AY 2024-2025. However, even if the period of limitation is considered from the date of search instead from the date of issuance of the impugned notice, the same would have to be reckoned from the AY 2023-24, which is the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the search was conducted. The petitioner has set out the tabular statement indicating that the AY 2013-2014 is beyond the period of 10 years. 5.The said tabular statement is reproduced below:- Date of Search —20.07.2022 This chart is prepared in light of first proviso to Section 149 of the Act read with Section 153A(1)(b) and Explanation 1 to Section 153A(1) of the Act 6.The learned counsel for the Revenue fairly concedes that the issue involved in the present case is covered by the earlier decision of this court in Dinesh Jindal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 20, Delhi & Others: Neutral Citation: 2024: DHC:4554-DB as well as the decision in the case of The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd : Neutral Citation : 2024:DHC: 2629-DB andKAD Housing Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-6, Delhi : Neutral Citation : 2024:DHC:8214-DB. 7.Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The impugned notice is set aside as being barred by limitation. 8.Consequently, the assessment order passed under Section 147 of the Act pursuant to the impugned notice, is also set aside. 9.The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application also stands disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ JANUARY 13, 2025 Ms/kct GIRISH KATHPALIA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any