DCIT Vs Atoll Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)
U/s 153C – ITAT Says 2017 Amendment Favours Revenue, Yet Delhi HC Has the Last Word: Binding Precedent Trumps Tribunal’s Own View
Summary: The Delhi ITAT dismissed Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13, holding itself bound by the jurisdictional Delhi High Court’s decision in PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. on the computation of the six/ten-year period under section 153C for a person other than the searched person. Although the Tribunal noted that its own interpretation of the post-Finance Act, 2017 provisions, as expressed in DCIT v. Sunil Bhala, favoured reckoning the period from the actual search date for searches conducted on or after 01.04.2017, it followed Ojjus Medicare because no stay of that judgment was shown. The Tribunal also directed that both parties would remain bound by the eventual outcome of the Revenue’s pending SLP and directed the AO to record and implement that direction. The order also condoned a two-day delay in filing the Revenue’s appeals.
An interesting judicial situation arose before the Delhi ITAT concerning the computation of the six/ten assessment-year period u/s 153C in the case of a person other than the person searched. What makes the decision significant is that the Tribunal expressly recorded that its own interpretation of the post-Finance Act, 2017 provisions favoured the Revenue, but nevertheless decided the appeals in favour of the assessee, being bound by the jurisdictional Delhi HC decision in PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. [2024] 465 ITR 101 (Delhi).
