2025 (5) TMI 1801 - HC - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153C - notice issued beyond the block period of six years - as alleged that during the course of search certain incriminating material was found which belonged to the petitioner or contained information relating to the petitioner HELD THAT - The block period of six years for which the assessments could be re-opened u/s 153C (1) (b) of the Act is required to be reckoned from 28.07.2022. Petitioner has handed over a tabular statement indicating the block of six years that could be covered under a notice issued u/s 153C of the Act which premised on a satisfaction note dated 28.07.2022. Concededly the extended period of ten years is not applicable in the present case. Thus the assumption of jurisdiction in respect of AY 2016-17 which falls beyond the block period of six years is not sustainable. The issues involved in the present case are covered in favour of the petitioner by earlier decisions of this Court in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. 2024 (4) TMI 268 - DELHI HIGH COURT . The impugned notice is set aside

Summary

The Delhi High Court, through Justice Vibhu Bakhrru (oral judgment), quashed a notice dated 29.07.2022 issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to AY 2016-17. The notice was based on incriminating material found during a search under Section 132 on 18.10.2019, and subsequent satisfaction notes dated 01.06.2022 and 28.07.2022 by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Court emphasized that the six-year block period for reopening assessments under Section 153C(1)(b) must be reckoned from the date of satisfaction (28.07.2022), covering AY 2017-18 to AY 2022-23. Since AY 2016-17 falls outside this block period and the extended ten-year period was not applicable, the AO's jurisdiction to reopen AY 2016-17 was "not sustainable." The Court relied on its precedent in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-1 v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024 SCC OnLine Del 2439) to support this conclusion. Accordingly, the impugned notice and all subsequent proceedings, including the assessment order, were set aside. The Court's interim order preventing adverse action pending hearing remains operative.