NARENDER KUMAR MITTAL,DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE 52, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3165/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 July 2026AY 2017-183 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 reopening was invalid because the approval under Section 151 was mechanical and lacked independent application of mind by the prescribed authority. This decision relied on the Supreme Court ruling in CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 challenged the reopening of assessment under Section 147. The primary issue was the validity of the reopening itself.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the validity of the assessment reopening due to a non-application of independent mind by the approving authority. The Tribunal also considered the procedural validity of the reopening process.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 29.06.2026Pronounced: 29.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3165/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Narender Kumar Mittal, Vs. JCIT, C/o- Mangalam Consulates, Range -52, Advocates, New Delhi 1205, First Floor, Sector - 8, Faridabad-121 006 PAN: AAGPM4850N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Narender Chhillar, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 29.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 29.06.2026 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, 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/250/2025-26/10862454414(1), dated 19.02.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.3165/Del/2026

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 31st March, 2021 to the Assessing Officer’s reopening proposal, wherein, he has recorded “I agree with the comments of the AO…………….…” than having applied its independent mind thereupon. 3. Thus, I am 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 29th June, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20th July, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2 | P a g e

ITA No.3165/Del/2026

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 →