Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Sh. Pankaj Jain (ITAT Delhi)
The Revenue filed seven appeals for AYs 2014-15 to 2020-21 challenging the CIT(A)’s deletion of protective additions made under Section 153C read with Section 144C following a search in the Sanjay Jain group.
The Tribunal noted that the corresponding substantive assessments in the hands of Mr. Jain had already been quashed by the CIT(A), and the Tribunal had upheld that decision on 22.04.2026 on the ground that no incriminating material was found or seized during the search.
Relying on the jurisdictional Delhi High Court decision in PCIT Vs. Electrical and Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal held that the protective additions could not survive once the corresponding substantive additions had been quashed.
Accordingly, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s orders deleting the protective additions and dismissed all seven Revenue appeals.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
These Revenue’s seven appeals ITA Nos. Nos.1042 to 1048 /Del/2026 for assessment years 2014-15 to 2020-21, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s orders dated 06.11.2025 (in AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16), 08.11.2025 (in AY 2016-17) and 10.11.2025 (in AYs 2017-18 to 2020-21) having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1082344369(1), 1082345345(1), 1082406180(1), 1082419911(1), 1082420387(1), 1082420965(1) and 1082421377(1), involving proceedings under section 153C r.w.s. 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
2. Suffice to say, it transpires at the outset that the Revenue’s identical sole substantive ground raised in all of its instant appeals seeks to revive the Assessing Officer’s action making “protective” addition(s) involving varying sums made in the assessee’s hands in furtherance to the department’s search action carried out in M/s. Sanjay Jain group of cases on 30.06.2019. Learned CIT(A) has admittedly deleted the same in the identical lower appellate discussion under challenge.
3. That being the case, we sought to know the final status of the aforesaid “substantive” addition(s) in the hands of Mr. Jain. We are informed that the learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate order dated 31 st October, 2025; as upheld in this tribunal’s order in the Revenue’s corresponding appeals ITA No.8488 to 8495/Del/2025 decided on 22.04.2026, has quashed the corresponding assessment(s) itself for want of any incriminating material found or seized during the course of search. It is in this factual backdrop that we hereby quote hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in PCIT Vs. Electrical and Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.598/2023 decided on 31.10.2023 that such a “protective” addition hardly had any legs to stand once the corresponding substantive addition stands quashed. We thus uphold the learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings in very terms.
4. These Revenue’s seven appeals ITA Nos.1042 to 1048 /Del/2026 are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th June, 2026
Author Bio
