MOHINDER KUMAR,SONIPAT HARYANA vs. ITO WARD 3, SONIPAT HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1224/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2025AY 2011-12Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 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 assessment was not sustainable as it lacked tangible material with a live nexus to the reasons for reopening. Citing the precedent of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., the appeal was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenged proceedings under Section 147/148 initiated by lower authorities to assess alleged unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 19,84,000 in Oriental Bank of Commerce. The assessee consistently denied making such deposits or having an account, and no supporting details were provided by the department.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 was sustainable in the absence of tangible material or a live nexus to the reasons for believing income escaped assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

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: Adv. &
For Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 24.06.2025

Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Mohinder Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, H. No. 1063/23, Tirth Market, Ward-3, Sonipat, Haryana-131001 Sonipat, Haryana-131001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABCPK6594N Assessee by: Sh. Ravi Mohan Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Naman Gupta, CA Revenue by : Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 24.06.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071770303(1) dated 01.01.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 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 at the outset that both the learned lower authorities had set into motion section 148/147 proceedings against the assessee so as to assess his alleged cash deposits in M/s Oriental Bank of Commerce to the tune of Rs.19,84,000/- as unexplained cash credits/unexplained investments; as the case may be. The assessee’s stand from day one all along has altogether denied to have made any such Mohinder Kumar bank account with M/s Oriental Bank of Commerce. There is further no dispute that no such account details are forthcoming either in the assessment order dated 16.11.2018 or in the lower appellate discussion.

4.

That being the clinching factual position, this tribunal are of the considered view that the impugned reopening itself is not sustainable since not based on any tangible material having live nexus with the reopening reasons in light of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. (2017) 82 taxmann.com 300 (Del.). Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →