SH. NARESH ARORA,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8332/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 September 2026AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the notice under Section 148 was issued by an AO without jurisdiction, as the assessee had consistently provided a Delhi address for filing returns. Therefore, the entire reassessment proceeding was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer (AO) to initiate reassessment proceedings. The notice under Section 148 was issued by an AO who the assessee claimed was not the jurisdictional AO, and was sent to an incorrect address.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was questioned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRADr. Rakesh Gupta, Sr Adv, Shri

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Sr Adv, Shri, Adv and Shri
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr DR
Hearing: 07/09/2026Pronounced: 14/09/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 8332/Del/2025 (A.Y 2011-12) Sh. Naresh Arora Vs. Income Tax Officer Parx Laureate Ward-2(5) Palm-9143, Sector-108 Ghaziabad Noida, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAFPA8927M Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Sr Adv, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv and Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv Revenue by: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr DR

Date of Hearing 07/09/2026 Date of pronouncement 14/09/2026

O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM.: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the

order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-

tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi under Section

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)

arising out of the Assessment Order dated 16.11.2018 passed by the

Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 147/144 of

the Act for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2 ITA No. 8332/DEL/2025 Naresh Arora Vs. ITO

2.

The Assessee has raised objection on the assumption of

jurisdiction by the Ld. AO in initiating proceeding under Section 147

of the Act for A.Y 2011-12 as illegal. The notice under Section 148 of

the Act appearing at page no. 18 of the Paper Book dated 26.03.2018

was issued by the ITO, Ward-2(5), Ghaziabad, who is not the

Jurisdictional AO of the Assessee as the case made out by the Ld. AR.

In-fact such notice was issued to Plot No. 115, B Block, Sector-50,

Noida, instead of the resident of the Assessee at 101/12, Aditya

Complex, Preet Vihar, Delhi-110092, the address mentioned in the

order passed by the Appellate Authority.

3.

The Assessee has further relied upon the ITR filed for A.Y 2011-

12 to 2016-17 mentioning the address of Delhi as narrated

hereinabove. In that view of the matter, the ITO, Delhi would be the

appropriate authority to initiate reassessment proceeding instead ITO,

Ward-2(5), Ghaziabad which is impugned before us as without

jurisdiction and, therefore, the entire proceeding is vitiated, void ab-

initio and thus, liable to be quashed as the crux of the submissions

made by the Ld. AR.

4.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by

the Ld. CIT(A) and referred the residential plot of land bearing B-115,

Sector- 50, Noida, UP purchased by the Assessee jointly with his wife

Smt. Varsha Arora as mentioned in the order impugned. According to

3 ITA No. 8332/DEL/2025 Naresh Arora Vs. ITO

her since the subject property is situated at Noida, the Ld. AO has

correctly assumed jurisdiction to initiate proceeding under Section

147 of the Act.

5.

We respectfully decline to accept such contention made by the

Ld. DR and having regard to fact that the Assessee all along and all

through filed her return disclosing the address at 101/12, Aditya

Complex, Preet Vihar, Delhi-110092, the impugned notice under

Section 148 of the Act dated 26.03.2018 appearing at page no. 18

issued by and under the signature of the ITO, Ward-2(5), Ghaziabad is

found to be without jurisdiction and, therefore, quashed.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14/09/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 14/09/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

4 ITA No. 8332/DEL/2025 Naresh Arora Vs. ITO

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →