$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 578/2026 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL II .....Appellant Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC with Ms.Harshita Kotru, Mr.Gaoraang Ranjan, Advs. versus M/S SOMANI WORSTED LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr.P.Roychaudhuri, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA O R D E R % 24.07.2026 CM APPL. 47030/2026 (delay in re-filing) 1. The instant application is filed by the appellant seeking condonation of 85 days’ delay in re-filing the appeal. 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 85 days in re-filing the appeal stands condoned. 3. The application stands disposed of. ITA 578/2026 4. The present appeal has been preferred by the Department under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) inter alia assailing the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in ITA Nos.1557/De1/2025 and 1558/De1/2025, whereby the appeals preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 23.12.2024 passed 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 30/07/2026 at 14:56:30 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)), have been dismissed. 5. The undisputed facts of the present case are that, a search was conducted by the Department under Section 132 of the Act of 1961 in the case of Sh.Rakesh Jain Group on 02.11.2017 and a satisfaction was recorded on 24.05.2021. The Assessment Year in question is, 2011-12. If calculated from such date i.e., 24.05.2021 (Assessment Year 2022-23), said Assessment Year namely 2011-12 is apparently beyond the limitation period of 10 years, as has been held by this Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. [2024] 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi). 6. The CIT(A) relied upon Ojjus Medicare (supra) and allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee which has been affirmed by the Tribunal. 7. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant-Department, could not point out any judgment contrary to the view which has been taken by the Delhi High Court. The only submission he advanced was that the matter is pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition, wherein notice has been issued. 8. Considering that law laid down by Ojjus Medicare (supra) still holds field, following the decision in Ojjus Medicare (supra), we dismiss the present appeal. DINESH MEHTA, J RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J JULY 24, 2026/kk 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 30/07/2026 at 14:56:30