ACIT, DELHI vs. MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA, UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9207/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 August 2026AY 2015-165 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the Revenue's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings. This was based on a concession by the Revenue that notices issued for AY 2015-16 on or after April 1, 2021, would be dropped as they fell outside the prescribed completion period.

What were the facts?

The Revenue reopened the assessment for AY 2015-16 based on information about accommodation entries received by the assessee in the guise of share transactions. The Assessing Officer treated the amount as unexplained income, but the CIT(A) deleted the addition. The Revenue appealed this deletion.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated beyond the prescribed time limit for AY 2015-16, considering a concession made by the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 149(1),Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 10(38),Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar Khiwani, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr
Hearing: 24/06/2026Pronounced: 11/08/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 9207/Del/2025 (A.Y 2015-16) ACIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta, D-206, Vikas Bhawan, I. P. D-74/3, Loha Mandi, Estate, New Delhi Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN:AAMPG7397J ITA No. 152/Del/2026 (A.Y 2015-16) Mahesh Kumar Gupta, Vs. ITO D-74/3, Loha Mandi, Ward-59 (3) Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN:AAMPG7397J

Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Khiwani, CA Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. (DR)

Date of Hearing 24/06/2026 Date of pronouncement 11/08/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

Objection filed by the assessee are directed against order dated

06.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income

Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre- Delhi arising out of

the assessment order dated 10.03.2023 passed under Section 147

r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

as to "the Act") for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015-16.

2 ITA No. 9207& 152/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta ITA No. 152/Del/2026 (A.Y 2015-16)

2.

Facts: For A.Y. 2015-16 the assessee filed his ITR declaring

income of Rs. 8,79,570/- and claimed exempt income of Rs.

1,03,28,480/-. The case was reopened under Section 147 on the

basis of information received from the Investigation Wing that

assessee had received accommodation entries of Rs. 71,41,000/- in

the guise of sale of shares of penny stock company M/s Negotium

International Trade Ltd. (formerly m/s Mahadushi International

Trade Ltd. ). Notice under Section148 was issued on 21.07.2022. In

response the assessee replied along with bank statements, contract

notice, d-mat account, purchase/sale details of shares and claimed

resultant long term capital gains as exempt under Section10(38) of

the Act. The Assessing Officer held that transactions in shares were

bogus accommodation entries. Shares were purchased in cash from

a non-functional entity and sold at exorbitant price without any

sound financial purpose. The AO treated a sum of Rs. 71,41,000/-

as unexplained income u/s 68 taxable u/s 115BBE of the Actand

added the same to the total income of the assessee. Assessment was

completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act at assessed income of Rs.

80,20,570/-. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A)deleted the addition.

3 ITA No. 9207& 152/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta 3. Aggrieved by the deletion of addition by the First Appellate

Authority the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The assesse

has filed cross-objection challenging the reopening itself.

4.

The assessee has challenged reopening on the ground that

reopening was barred by limitation under Section149(1). The AO

failed to follow the procedure prescribed under Section148A(b) and

148A(d). Entire reassessment framed under Section147 r.w.s. 144B

is invalid in law. Original notice u/s 148 was issued on 16.4.2021

under the unamended provision of the Act with prior approval u/s

151 dated 15.4.2021.

5.

The assessment year involved is A.Y. 2015-16. Notice under

Section148 of the Act for reopening of assessment was issued on

16.04.2021 The assessee’s counsel joins issue here to this effect that

as per the concession on behalf of the Department recorded in para

19(f) in the case of UOI & Ors. V. Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46 (SC) the

impugned notice under Section148 issued in assessee’s case for A.Y.

2015-16 beyond 31.03.2021 for reopening is liable to be struck

down at the threshold.

6.

Paragraph (f) reads as above reads as under:

“(f) The revenue concedes that for A.Y. 2015-16 all notices issued

on or after April 1,2021 will have to be dropped as they will not

4 ITA No. 9207& 152/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta fall for completion during the period prescribed under the

Taxation and under Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain

provisions) Act, 2020.”

7.

Under these facts and circumstances of the matter, since

concession has been recorded as above, admittedly the impugned

assessment under Section 147 of the Act for A.Y 2015-16 is liable to

be quashed and, therefore, we pass order accordingly.

8.

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

9.

The appeal preferred by the Revenue therefore, dismissed as

having become in-fructuous.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11/08/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 11/08/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS Copy forwarded to

1.

Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

5 ITA No. 9207& 152/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →