VIDHI GUPTA,. vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(1) GHAZIABAD, .

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5409/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2026AY 2016-172 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 quashed the reassessment proceedings as they were initiated beyond the prescribed time limit of 6 years from the assessment year and did not involve an addition exceeding Rs. 50 lacs, as per Section 149(1)(b).

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 and made an addition of Rs. 5,61,725/- under section 56(2)(vii)(b). This addition was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated after a significant time lapse and whether it met the criteria for reopening under Section 149(1)(b).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 56(2)(vii)(b),Section 149(1)(b)

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: Adv. & Sh. Shyam Sundar, Adv
Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year: 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1087041704(1), dated 09.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned departmental authorities had initiated the impugned reopening in the assessee’s case vide section 148 notice dated 28.4.2023 finally culminating the Assessing

Officer’s assessment dated 27.2.2024 making sections 56(2)(vii)(b) addition of Rs. 5,61,725/- as upheld in the CIT(A)/NFAC’s lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, this Tribunal having noticed that the impugned reopening itself is not sustainable in law since set into motion after a time period of 6 years from AY 2016-17 and not involving any addition of more than Rs. 50 lacs as prescribed in light of section 149(1)(b) of the Act and in light of Naresh Balchandrao Shinde vs. ITO (2023) 451 ITR 149 (Bom). Quashed in very terms.

4.

All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court as on 08.07.2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 23rd July, 2026 SR BHATNAGAR Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) Appellant: (2) Respondent: (3) CIT (4) CIT (Appeals) (5) DR, I.T.A.T.

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 →