Supreme Court In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. We Note That The Said Issue Was Recorded By This Court In The Orderpassed On 13.05.2025, Which Reads As Under

$~73 to 77 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ITA 143/2025 and CM Nos.28619/2025 & 28620/2025THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -CENTRAL -1.....AppellantversusBJN HOLDINGS LTD......RespondentAND+ITA 144/2025 and CM Nos. 28623/2025 & 28624/2025THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -CENTRAL -1.....AppellantversusB.J.N. HOLDINGS LTD......RespondentAND+ITA 145/2025 and CM Nos. 28626/2025 & 28627/2025THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -CENTRAL -1.....AppellantversusBJN HOLDINGS LTD......RespondentAND+ITA 146/2025 and CM Nos. 28872/2025 & 28873/2025THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -CENTRAL -1.....AppellantversusBJN HOLDINGS LTD......RespondentAND+ITA 147/2025 and CM Nos. 28900/2025 & 28901/2025THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -CENTRAL -1.....AppellantversusBJN HOLDINGS LTD......RespondentPresent:Mr Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr Pratyaksh Gupta, Advocate forappellant in Item Nos.73 to 77.Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Mr Vaibhav Kulkarni, This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 Advocate for respondent in Item Nos.73 to 77.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R15.05.2025 % 1.The Revenue has filed this batch of appeals under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] impugning a common order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA Nos.42/Del/2022 to46/Del/2022 in respect of Assessment Years [AYs] 2006-07 to 2010-11. Thesaid appeals emanate from assessment orders framed under Section 153Cread with Section 143(3) of the Act. 2.The Assessee had successfully appealed the said assessment ordersbefore the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi[CIT(A)].TheRevenue had,thereafter,appealed theordersdated31.01.2020 passed by the CIT(A) before the learned ITAT, which weredismissed by the impugned order. 3.The CIT(A) as well as the learned ITAT had concurrently found thatthe assessments made were not sustainable as it was made in the name of anassessee, which had ceased to exist. 4.However, in another offshoot to the challenge to intimation ofreassessment proceedings, which emanated from orders passed by this Courtin writ petition filed by the Assessee; the Supreme Court has recorded afinding that no incriminating material was found against the Assessee.Concededly, in view of the said finding, the assessment orders made forAYs 2006-07 to 2010-11 pursuant to the notice issued under Section 153Cof the Act, are in any view unsustainable. It is authoritatively settled by the This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Abhisar BuildwellPvt. Limited: (2024) 2 SCC 433, whereby the Court upheld the decision ofthis Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kabul Chawla: 380 ITR 573that in the absence of any incriminating material, the Assessing Officer cannot assume jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act. 5.We note that the said issue was recorded by this Court in the orderpassed on 13.05.2025, which reads as under: This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Abhisar BuildwellPvt. Limited: (2024) 2 SCC 433, whereby the Court upheld the decision ofthis Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kabul Chawla: 380 ITR 573that in the absence of any incriminating material, the Assessing Officer cannot assume jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act. 5.We note that the said issue was recorded by this Court in the orderpassed on 13.05.2025, which reads as under: “1.The Revenue has filed the present appeals impugning acommon order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA Nos.42/Del/2022 to 46/Del/2022 in respect ofAssessment Years [AYs] 2006-07 to 2010-11.The saidappeals were preferred by the Revenue against the orders dated31.01.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-24, New Delhi [CIT(A)]. In terms of the saidorders, the respective assessment orders which were subjectmatter of challenge before the CIT(A) were set aside followingthe decision of this court in PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.:NeutralCitationNo.:2015:DHC:10110-DBandSpiceInfotainment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax: (2012)247 CTR 500 on the ground that the assessments had beenframed on a person that did not exist is illegal and an orderpassed pursuant to is nullity.The learned ITAT found noreason to differ from the decision of the CIT(A). 2.It is in the aforesaid context that the Revenue contendsthat the CIT(A) and learned ITAT were not justified in passingthe order and not appreciating that the assessment had beenframed on the Assessee through its successor-in-interest M/sBJN Holding Ltd. 3.Mr Vohra, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for theAssessee on advance notice, submits that the entire issue hasbeen rendered academic in view of the decision of theSupreme Court in the Assessee’s case rendered on 25.04.2023.He submits that the assessments in the present case were This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 framed under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [theAct] read with Section 143(3) of the Act. It is the Assessee’scase that there was no incriminating material that wouldwarrant exercise of jurisdiction under 153C of the Act. 4.In the aforesaid context, the Assessee had filed a writpetition before this court being WP(C) 1708/2014 challengingthe validity of Section 153C of the Act. The same wasdisposed of by a judgment dated 02.05.2018 rendered by thiscourt in a batch of matters where similar challenge had beenraised by the Assessees in the context of the search conductedin Dhingra Group of cases. This court had rejected the saidcontention by referring to the decision in the case ofCommissioner of Income Tax v. Kabul Chawla: 380 ITR 573as well as the certain other decisions where exercise ofjurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act was held to becircumscribed to the extent that the same could be invokedonly on the basis of incriminating material found during thesearch. These decisions, according to this court, had renderedthe challenge to the provisions of Section 153 of the Actacademic. The Revenue had appealed the said decision beforethe Supreme Court. The said batch of appeals [Civil AppealNo.6634/2021 captioned Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax Central Circle 20 v. M/s U.K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. andother connected matters] that also included Civil AppealNo.6656/2021 which arose from the order passed by this courtin WP(C) 1708/2014, were dismissed by the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court upheld the said decision and also recordedthe following finding: “As observed hereinabove, as no incriminating materialwas found in case of any of the Assessees either fromthe Assessee or from the third party and the assessmentswere under Section 153-C of the Act, the High Court hasrightly set aside the Assessment Order(s). Therefore, theimpugned judgment and order(s) passed by the HighCourt do not require any interference by this Court.Hence, all these appeals deserve to the dismissed and areaccordingly dismissed.” This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 5.In view of the conceded position that no incriminatingmaterial was found during the search pursuant to which noticesunder Section 153C of the Act were issued to the Assessee, thesaidassessmentswouldnotstand,notwithstandingtheoutcome of the challenge sought to be raised in the presentappeals. We note that the decision of the Supreme Court wasrendered on 25.04.2023, which was few days prior to theimpugned order and thus it is understandable that the saiddecision was not brought to the notice of the learned ITAT. 6.In view of the above, we are prima facie of the view thatno question of law would arise for consideration in the facts ofthis case. 7.Mr Bhatia, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenuerequests for time to take instructions in view of the facts thathave been now placed by Mr Vohra, before this court. 8.List on 15.05.2025.” 6.Mr Bhatia, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submitsthat although the fate of the present appeals are concluded in view of thefindings recorded by the Supreme Court in the order dated 25.04.2023 inCivil Appeal No.6634/2021 and Other Connected Matters captionedDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 20 v. M/s U.K. Paints(Overseas) Ltd., however, there was some material on record which the AOhad found was incriminating. He submits that in the event at a subsequentstage, the findings as recorded by the Supreme Court in the said order areeither clarified or recalled, the Revenue may be afforded an opportunity torevive the present appeals. 7.We find no reason to reject the said request. In view of the above, thepresent appeals are disposed of with liberty to the Revenue to revive the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20 same in the event, the findings to the effect that no incriminating materialwas found in respect of the Assessee are clarified, or set aside, or recalled.We also clarify that the revival of the appeal in any such event would notautomatically entail admission of the present appeals, The learned counselfor the Assessee had raised the objection as to the maintainability of thepresent appeals at threshold and therefore, this Court has not examinedwhether these appeals throw up any substantial questions of law as yet.8.The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. All pendingapplications are also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 15, 2025RK TEJAS KARIA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/05/2025 at 11:52:20