RAJIV KUMAR KHANNA,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7840/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2025AY 2010-112 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 invalid because the approval obtained from the prescribed authority was mechanical. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal pertains to the assessment year 2010-11. The primary issue raised was the validity of the reopening of assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment due to a mechanical 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 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: SMC NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, Adv.<br>Sh. Jayant Bothra, CA |
For Respondent: DR |

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: "SMC" NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.7840/Del/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Sh. Rajiv Kumar Khanna, | Vs. | ACIT, B-1/802, Block-12, | Circle-19, Purvanchal Silver City, | New Delhi Plot No. 93/01, Noida PAN : ALWPK1779K (Appellant) | (Respondent)

Assessee by | Ms. Monika Aggarwal, Adv. Sh. Jayant Bothra, CA Department by | Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing | 26.05.2025 Date of pronouncement | 26.05.2025

ORDER

This assessee's appeal for assessment year 2010-11, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27 [in short, the "CIT(A)"], New Delhi's order dated 09.11.2018 passed in case no. 152/17-18, involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

- 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. - 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the validity of the impugned reopening itself, which goes to the root of the matter. This is for the precise

reason that the learned counsel representing the assessee has

invited our attention to the prescribed authority's section 151

approval to the Assessing Officer's reopening proposal, wherein, he

has recorded "I am satisfied……..".

4.

Learned counsel's case accordingly is that the impugned

reopening itself is invalid since based on a mere mechanical

approval of the said prescribed authority. I make it clear that the

foregoing clinching fact of the competent authority's mechanical

approval has indeed gone unrebutted from the department side. I

thus quote CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (2015)

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) to quash the impugned assessment.

Ordered accordingly.

5.

All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

6.

This assessee's appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26th May, 2025

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 26th May, 2025.

RK/-

Copy forwarded to:

- 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT - 4. CIT(A) - 5. DR

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →