CBS HOLDING (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMANAssessment Year: 2012-13 CBS Holdings (P) Ltd., M/s. S.B. Garg & Co., CAs, 20/17, Shakti Nagar, New Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(4), New Delhi PAN: AADCC3702D (Appellant)
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s order dated 11.05.2018 passed in case no.
10284/16-17, involving proceedings under section 143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Assessee by None
Department by Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
25.06.2025
Date of pronouncement
25.06.2025
2 | P a g e
A perusal of the instant case file reveals with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself wherein the learned Assessing Officer had recorded the following reasons dated 21.02.2015, reading as under: “21.02.2015 Reasons for reopening the assessment proceedings in the case of M/s. CBS Holding Pvt. Ltd. for the A.Y. 2012-13 u/s 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961;
The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and 2011-12. In both the Assessment Years, substantial additions (more than Rs.10 lakhs) have been made to the income of the assessee. However, the assessee did not file its return of income for the Assessment year 2012-13. 2. In absence of any return of income for the AY 2012-13, it is possible that income may have been escaped from assessment.
Therefore, I have reason to believe that the assessee has concealed his income by not filing the return of income for the Assessment Years 2012-13. 4. Therefore, the case is being selected for scrutiny u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961.”
This being the clinching factual position, learned CIT(DR) hardly dispute that the above extracted reopening reasons do not even prima facie indicate as to what is the assessee’s taxable income liable to be assessed which had escaped assessment. We thus quote CIT vs. Gupta Abhushan (P) Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 166 (Del), (2024) 166 taxmann.com 72 (Del.), (2015) 64 taxmann.com 257 (Del), CIT Vs. Indo Arab Air Services (Del.) to conclude that the impugned reopening itself is not sustainable in law since based on 3 | P a g e total non-application of mind with vague reasons which is hereby quashed. Ordered accordingly.
All assessee’s remaining pleadings on merits has been rendered academic.
5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th June, 2025 (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 25th June, 2025. RK/-