SINGHAL FASTENERS COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 23(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1993/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 July 2025AY 2007-08Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid due to a mechanical approval by the prescribed authority, citing the decision in CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. The reopening was therefore quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08 against the order of the CIT(A)-31, New Delhi, which arose from proceedings under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment due to a lack of proper approval from the prescribed authority under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 17.07.2025Pronounced: 30.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/s Singhal Fasteners Company Pvt. Vs Income Tax Officer, Ltd., 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Ward-23(4), Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACS1428H Assessee by : Sh. Abhishek Mathur, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08, arises against the CIT(A)-31, New Delhi’s in case No. 233/17- 18/58/15-16 dated 27.10.2020, in proceedings u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the reopening itself for want of a valid approval by the learned prescribed authority u/s. 151 of the Act. The tribunal’s attention is invited to the approval dated 07.03.2014 (page 144 in paper book) wherein the learned prescribed authority had accepted the Assessing Singhal Fasteners Company Pvt. Ltd. Officer’s reopening proposal as “I am satisfied………”. This being the clinching factual position emanating from the record, we hereby quote CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC) that such a mechanical approval vitiates the entire reopening; and therefore, we accept the instant legal ground in very terms. This reopening is quashed therefore.

4.

All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →