SANJEEV ARORA,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8124/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 July 2026AY 2012-133 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 found that the approval for reopening under section 151 was mechanically granted, lacking independent application of mind by the prescribed authority. Therefore, the reopening was held to be invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order. The primary issue raised was the validity of the reopening of assessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

The key issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment due to a non-application of independent mind by the prescribed authority while granting approval under section 151.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv, Adv. Ms. Harshita Srinivasan, Adv
Hearing: 30.06.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081849465(1), dated 17.10.2025, involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

ITA No.8124/Del/2025

Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the validity of the impugned reopening itself, which goes to the root of the matter. This is for the precise reason that the learned counsel representing assessee has invited our attention to the prescribed authority’s section 151 approval dated 13.03.2019 to the Assessing Officer’s reopening proposal, wherein, he has recorded “I am satisfied……………..” than having applied its independent mind thereupon. 3. We thus are of the considered view that the impugned reopening itself is invalid since based on a mere mechanical approval of the said prescribed authority in light of CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) to quash the same in very terms. Ordered accordingly. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th June, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 21st July, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2 | P a g e

ITA No.8124/Del/2025

2.

Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →