SHELLA DEVI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 60(7), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2829/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2026AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the impugned reopening was initiated based on a notice under section 148 dated 13.04.2021, and the income sought to be assessed was less than Rs. 50 lacs. Following the Bombay High Court ruling in Naresh Balchandrarao Shinde v. ITO, the reopening did not satisfy the statutory criteria of Rs. 50 lacs and was therefore quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order concerning proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144. The reopening was initiated by a notice under section 148 dated 13.04.2021.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment. Specifically, whether the reopening satisfied the monetary threshold stipulated under Section 149(1) of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 149(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 19.08.2026Pronounced: 19.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless

ITA No. 2829/Del/2026

Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1085451048(1), dated 02.02.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

Coming to the first legal issue of validity of the impugned reopening, it transpires during the course of hearing that there is hardly much a need to deal with the relevant factual matrix at length. This is for the precise reason that the impugned reopening in the assesse’s case stood initiated vide notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 13.04.2021 (page No. 10 of the paper book) whereas the income sought to be assessed/ assessed in her case was Rs. 26.25 lacs i.e. less than Rs. 50 lacs, so as to be hit u/s 149(1) of the Act. This being the clinching factual position, I hereby quote Naresh Balchandrarao Shinde v. ITO [(2023) 451 ITR 149 (Bom)] to hold the impugned reopening does not satisfy the statutory criteria of the assessee’s income escaping assessment of Rs. 50 lacs which is hereby quashed in very terms.

ITA No. 2829/Del/2026

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/08/2026.

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27/08/2026. Binita, Sr. PS 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 →