+W.p.(C) 3509/2025 And Cm Appl v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr

$~110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 3509/2025 and CM APPL. 16394/2025LANDCRAFT DEVELOPERS PRIVATELIMITED.....PetitionerThrough:MrSalilKapoor,MrSumitLalchandani, Ms Ananya Kapoor andMr Shivam Yadav, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE 27, DELHI & ANR......RespondentsThrough:Mr Gaurav Gupta, senior standingcounsel with Mr Shivendra Singh andMr Yojit Pareek, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R21.04.2025 % 1.The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a notice dated19.12.2023 issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [theAct] in respect of Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner also prays thatthe respondents be restrained from proceeding further with the aforesaidimpugned notice. 2.The petitioner had filed its return of income under Section 139(1) ofthe Act in respect of Assessment Year 2018-19 on 28.10.2018. 3.On 24.03.2022, a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was issuedby the Assessing Officer calling upon the petitioner to show causewhy proceedings for re-assessment of income chargeable to tax in respect ofAY 2018-19 not be initiated. This was followed by an order dated25.04.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act holding that it was a fit 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 30/04/2025 at 16:03:50 case for issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The petitionerwas served with the said order along with a notice under Section 148 of theAct. 4.In the meanwhile, a search was conducted under Section 132 of theAct in respect of entities belonging to the Alankrit Group and panchnamasdated 18.10.2019 and 21.10.2019 were prepared. Thereafter, the AO of thesearched entities prepared a satisfaction note recording his satisfaction thatcertain documents, which were found and seized during the course of thesearch conducted under Section 132 of the Act belong to the Assessee. Therelevant documents and material found during the search were also handedover by the AO exercising jurisdiction in respect of the searched person(s) tothe AO exercising jurisdiction in respect of the Assessee. On receipt of thesaid material, the AO also examined the same and recorded his satisfactionthat the documents and material handed over had a bearing on the income ofthe Assessee. Paragraph 3 of the said satisfaction note recorded by the AOon 08.11.2023 is relevant and is set out below: “3. From the analysis of ledgers related to Sh. Sudhir Gupta, thefollowing beneficiary is seen to have taken accommodation entryagainst unaccounted cash or otherwise as tabulated below: 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 30/04/2025 at 16:03:50 5.A plain reading of the aforementioned satisfaction note dated08.11.2023 indicates that the AO did not find any incriminating materialhaving a bearing on the income of the petitioner for AY 2018-19.Concededly, absent any material for the relevant assessment year, theproceedings under Section 153C of the Act could not be initiated for the saidyear. 6.The aforesaid issue is covered by the decision of this Court inSakshamCommoditiesLtd.v.IncomeTaxOfficer:[2024]161taxmann.com 485 (Delhi) and the decision of the Supreme Court inCommissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Sinhgad Technical EducationSociety: [2017] 8 S.C.R. 463 as well as the decision in the case of DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 20 v. M/s U.K. Paints(Overseas) Ltd.: Civil Appeal No.6634/2021, decided on 25.04.2023. 7.The petitioner also challenged assessment as being barred bylimitation.However, it is not necessary to examine that question since 6.The aforesaid issue is covered by the decision of this Court inSakshamCommoditiesLtd.v.IncomeTaxOfficer:[2024]161taxmann.com 485 (Delhi) and the decision of the Supreme Court inCommissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Sinhgad Technical EducationSociety: [2017] 8 S.C.R. 463 as well as the decision in the case of DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 20 v. M/s U.K. Paints(Overseas) Ltd.: Civil Appeal No.6634/2021, decided on 25.04.2023. 7.The petitioner also challenged assessment as being barred bylimitation.However, it is not necessary to examine that question since 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 30/04/2025 at 16:03:50 admittedly, the challenge to the impugned notice is required to be sustainedon the ground that it had been issued without any incriminating material inrespect of the relevant assessment year. 8.In view of the above, the impugned notice is set aside. Allproceedings initiated by the AO pursuant to the said notice are also set aside.The pending application is also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J APRIL 21, 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 30/04/2025 at 16:03:50