PRAKASH CHAND GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(A)-20, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2287/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 June 2025AY 2009-10Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY (Accountant Member)3 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 emphasized that recording reasons is an absolute necessity before initiating a notice under Section 148. Since no reasons for reopening were produced, it was concluded that none were actually recorded. Consequently, the entire assessment proceedings were deemed to lack jurisdiction and were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order sustaining an assessment made under Section 143(3)/147 for AY 2009-10. The assessee challenged the initiation of reassessment proceedings, primarily citing non-service of notice under Section 148, non-recording of reasons to believe, and mechanical approval under Section 151. It was contended that reasons for reopening were never provided despite repeated requests.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 were valid, given the alleged non-recording of 'reasons to believe' and mechanical approval under Section 151, thereby questioning the jurisdiction of the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, DELHI

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr
Hearing: 04.06.2025Pronounced: 25.06.2025

The instant appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.12.2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-20, Delhi, arising out of the Assessment Order dated 30.12.2016, passed by ITO, Ward 61(2), New Delhi, under Section 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

The assessee at the very onset challenged the initiation of Section 147 by submitting the revised ground of appeal:

“1. The Hon CIT (A)-20 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the assessment as notice u/s 148 has not been served on the assessee. Hence, the assessment may be quashed.

2. The Hon CIT (A)-20 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the assessment as reason to believe has not been recorded in the case. Hence, the assessment may be quashed.

3. The Hon CIT (A)-20 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the assessment as there is a mechanical approval u/s 151 without application of mind. Hence, the assessment may be quashed.”

3.

The assessee submitted the following documents by way of paper book:

4.

Reasons for reopening is not available. The ld. AR strenuously submitted that the assessee had tried a number of times with the department to get hold of reasons but the same was never supplied to him.

5.

The Ld. DR relied on the orders passed by the lower authorities.

6.

We have given careful submission to the above facts. Recording of reasons is absolute necessity before initiating notice under Section 148. In this case, no reasons for reopening were brought before us. Thus, it is absolutely clear that no reasons were actually recorded. Accordingly, we hold that the entire assessment proceedings lacks jurisdiction and has no legs to stand upon. The entire addition is liable to be deleted ex- consequenti.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.06.2025

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →