AMAN CHAUDHARY,GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070503578(1) dated 20.11.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of impugned reopening itself as the learned Assessing Officer had set into motion section 148/147 mechanism against the assessee regarding acquisition of capital assets/purchase of immovable property having value of Rs.1,24,74,000/- whereas his reassessment framed on Aman Chaudhary 2 19.12.2019 ended up adding the sale in question of Rs.21,93,500/-, made in the relevant previous year.
This being the clinching factual position, I hereby quote 236 (Bom.) to conclude that once the learned assessing authority has not made any addition qua the above sole reason of reopening, the impugned addition in the assessee’s hands representing the alleged capital gains is not sustainable in law. Deleted accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 04/06/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)
Judicial Member
Dated: 04/06/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*