FAHEEMA,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD 1(1)(3), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7173/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 September 2026AY 2019-203 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 reassessment order was not sustainable in law as a mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was not issued. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from a reassessment order passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee argued that the reassessment was not sustainable in law due to the non-issuance of a notice under Section 143(2).

What were the issues?

Whether a reassessment order framed under Section 147 is valid without the issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Dr. Sundeep Jain, Advocate (V/C)
Hearing: 02.09.2026Pronounced: 02.09.2026

1 7173/Del/2026 Faheema Meerut

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member

ITA No.7173/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vs ITO Faheema Mundali Garh Road, Ward- 1 (1)(3) Meerut Meerut PAN No.AEYPF1941F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Assessee by: Sh. Shrey Jain, Advocate, Dr. Sundeep Jain, Advocate (V/C) Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 02.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 02.09.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year, arises against the NFAC, Delhi DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1087191767(1) dated 11.03.2026, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. For the reasons stated in the assesses’s condonation averments, delay of 33 days in filing of instant appeal is

2 7173/Del/2026 Faheema Meerut

hereby condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 4. The assessee/ appellant first and foremost argument raised herein that the learned Assessing Officer’s impugned reassessment framed on 24.11.2023 itself is not sustainable in law for want of issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. It is made clear that the said assessment order at page-2 nowhere indicates issuance and service of such notice itself held mandatory the Hotel Blue Moon Vs. ACIT (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). Coupled with this, the assessee’s learned counsel has further invited the tribunal’s attention to his return submitted on 26.10.2023 in response to the Assessing Officer’s section 148 notice as well (page -12 of the paper book). 5. Faced with the situation, this tribunal hereby concludes that the impugned assessment framed in the assessee’s case is a non-est one in law which is hereby quashed for non-issuance of section 143(2) notice in very terms. Ordered accordingly. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

3 7173/Del/2026 Faheema Meerut

6.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 02/09/2026.

Sd/- (Satbeer Singh Godara) Judicial Member Dated: 21/09/2026 *NEHA, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →