DALEL SINGH,SONIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SONIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3189/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 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 Assessing Officer had not recorded that the cash deposits represented income that had escaped assessment. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the impugned reopening.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order that arose from proceedings under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer initiated Section 148/147 proceedings for verification of the source of cash deposits in a bank account.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148

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 ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 23.07.2025Pronounced: 23.07.2025

Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Dalel Singh, Vs Income Tax Officer, 209, Rewali, Sonepat, Ward-1, Haryana-131039 Sonepat, Haryana-131001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BOVPS5820L Assessee by: Sh. Samyak Jain, CA & Sh. Subodh, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Chennai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1075011854(1) dated 25.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 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 legal issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself as the learned Assessing Officer makes it clear in his assessment order dated 15.12.2019 in para 1 that he had set into motion section 148/147 proceedings “for verification of the source of cash amount deposited in bank account and for verification of other bank entries”.

Dalel Singh 4. The above being the clinching factual position, it is clear that the learned Assessing Officer had nowhere recorded that the assessee’s above cash deposits infact represented his income liable to be assessed having escaped assessment; and, therefore, in light of Le Passage to India Tours & Travels (P.) Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2015) 58 taxmann.com 144 (Delhi), this tribunal hereby quash the impugned reopening in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

5.

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 →