Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1, Delhi vs Patanjali Ayurved Limited

$~80 to 83
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of Decision: 10 September, 2026
th
Date of Uploading: 15 September, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010033172026
+ ITA 80/2026&CM APPL. 6824/2026
# CNR No. DLHC010032482026
+ ITA 81/2026&CM APPL. 6843/2026
# CNR No. DLHC010032562026
+ ITA 83/2026&CM APPL. 6922/2026
# CNR No. DLHC010035192026
+ ITA 91/2026&CM APPL. 7278/2026
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI
.....Appellant
Through: Mr. Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with
Mr. Ashvini Kr. and Mr.
Rishabh Nangia, JSCs
alongwith Mr. Nikhil Jain and
Ms. Nancy Jain, Advocates.
versus
PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni and Mr.
Sandip Nagar, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
J U D G M E N T
Per DINESH MEHTA, J. ( Oral )
1. These appeals portray a rather shocking picture of the procedural lapses
and opaqueness in which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the Tribunal’), the highest fact-finding body, has been passing
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 1 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59

the orders in a zeal rather over-anxiety of disposing the cases. In the order
under consideration, where the learned Members of the Tribunal have neither
dealt with any contention of the assessee nor have, they discussed the issues
involved in the appeals and disposed of seven appeals, vide an order which
does not even contain seven paragraphs. We are not much concerned with the
size of the order but what shocks us is, the non-application of mind and undue
haste which learned Members of the Tribunal have exhibited.
2. We cannot but end the matter here without recording our displeasure
particularly in relation to the fact that the members of the Tribunal have heard
four appeals being ITA Nos. 534 to 537/Del/2025 for Assessment Years
(AYs) 2013-14 to 2015-16 and 2017-18, clearly recording the date of hearing
to be 06.08.2025 and the date of pronouncement to be 06.08.2025 and
surprisingly, a common order has been passed, pronounced and issued in
relation to other set of appeals being ITA Nos. 605 to 607/Del/2025 filed by
the revenue for AYs. 2014-15, 2013-14 and 2015-16, showing date of hearing
as well as the date of pronouncement to be 13.08.2025.
3. When the matter was first listed before this court on 02.02.2026, even
Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee, was
surprised and wanted to ensure from the record, including certified copy of
the order.
Today, after going through the certified copies of the orders and
4.
enquiry at his end, Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel fairly submitted that there is
an apparent procedural error on part of the Tribunal, maybe, due to
inadvertence.
5. Mr. Puneet Rai, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the revenue,
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 2 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59

contended that the learned Members of the Tribunal have observed that once
the Assessing Officer (AO) had issued notice under Section 153C of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 on 06.08.2021, all these Assessment Years 2013-14to
2015-16 and 2017-18 are “unabated” ones and rejected revenue’s contention.
On perusal of the impugned order, we are unable to comprehend
6.
anything out of it, as it is bereft of any logic, reasoning or rationale behind
it.Apart from the procedural lacuna, we fail to understand that how a common
order can be passed and released in relation to four appeals, which were heard
and qua which the order was pronounced on 06.08.2025, whereas other three
appeals were heard and order was pronounced on 13.08.2025.
7. It is therefore, clear that the learned Members have shown undue haste
rather recklessness while passing and signing the order, and even their staff
failed to bring it to notice of the learned Members while getting the order
signed. Such type of negligence cannot be countenanced. The Appellate
Authorities, who are sitting in the highest pedestal of the appellate rung
entrusted with fact finding inquiry.
8. We deem it appropriate to reproducethe scanned copy of the impugned
order passed by the Tribunal, which ishereunder:
“The instant batch of seven appeals involves the single
assessee, namely, M/s. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. This
assessee and the department have filed their respective
three cross appeals each ITA Nos. ITA Nos.534 to
536/Del/2025 and ITA Nos. 606, 605 & 607/Del/2025,
against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 24
[in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s separate orders,
dated 26.11.2024 (for AYs: 2013-14 and 2014-15) and
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 3 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59

27.11.2024 (for AY: 2015-16), passed in case nos.
CIT(A), Delhi-24/10102/2012- 13, 10194/2013-14 and
11029/2014-15, in proceedings under section 143(3)
r.w.s. 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. The assessee’s
last appeal ITA No.537/Del/2025 is directed against
CIT(A)-24, New Delhi’s order dated 27.12.2024 passed
in case no. CIT(A), Delhi- 24/10463/2016-17 involving
proceedings under section 153C of the Act.
Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
2. We notice during the course of hearing that the
instant batch of seven cases i.e. assessee’s four and the
Revenue’s three cross-appeals, arises from a common
search action dated 31st October to 3rd November,
2018 in M/s. Hawala Traders Group leading to
initiation of section 153C proceedings herein which
finally culminated in the impugned assessments dated
th
27 March, 2023 in question. And that the learned
Assessing Officer himself clarified in the assessment
order(s) at page 2 para 4 that “in the case of Sh. Sumit
Jindal it was found that he has provided non-genuine
bills to………….., including “M/s. Patanjali Ayurved
Ltd.” i.e. the assessee. Meaning thereby that no
addition herein has been made which could be held to
be based on any specific incriminating or seized
material during “search”; held as mandatory in PCIT
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 4 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59

Vs. Abhisar BuildwellPvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212
(SC).
4. We make it clear that once the learned Assessing
Officer had issued his section 153C notice on
06.08.2021, all these assessment years i.e. AY 2013-14
to 2015-16 & 2017-18 are “unabated” ones; and,
therefore, we hardly find any merit in the Revenue’s
vehement contentions supporting the four impugned
assessments, which are hereby quashed in very terms.
All other pleadings on merits between the parties
herein stand rendered academic.
5. These assessee’s four appeals ITA Nos.534 to
537/Del/2025 are allowed and the Revenue’s three
cross appeals ITA Nos.605, 606 & 607/Del/2025 are
dismissed, in above terms. A copy of this common order
be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 6th &
13th August, 2025 ”
9. We have no other option, but to set aside all the seven orders passed by
the Tribunal, regardless of fact that there is no appeal filed by the Department
(may be because of the monetary limits). All the impugned orders passed by
ITAT so also the orders which are not under challenge (because of monetary
limits set by the Central Board of Direct Taxes) are hereby quashed and set
aside. Consequently, the appeals bearing ITA Nos. 534 to 537/Del/2025 and
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 5 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59

ITA Nos. 605 to 607/Del/2025 are hereby restored to their original numbers
to be decided afresh by the Tribunal.
10. Copy of this order be sent to President of the Tribunal so also Secretary
of the Ministry of Law and Justice for information. The President of the
Tribunal is directed to ensure that these appeals are heard by any Bench other
than the Bench which has passed this order.
Needless to mention that we have not made any observation on merits
11.
of the case, and therefore, the Tribunal shall be free to take independent view
of the matter, in accordance with law.
12. The present appeals stand disposed of in above stated terms. Pending
applications also stand disposed of.
DINESH MEHTA
(JUDGE)
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
(JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 10, 2026/ v
Signature Not Verified
ITA 80/2026 & connected matters Page 6 of 6
Signed By:MANISHA
RAJPUT
Signing Date:15.09.2026
11:13:59