SHAILESH KUMAR,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 43(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3786/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 July 2026AY 2020-213 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 once the sole subject matter of the reopening was deleted by the lower appellate authority, the reopening itself was invalid. All other remaining disallowances became academic.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned assessment year 2020-21, involving proceedings under section 147. The primary addition made by the Assessing Officer, which formed the basis for reopening, was deleted by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The key issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment when the primary addition leading to the reopening was deleted by the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 02.06.2026Pronounced: 02.06.2026

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year: 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, the CIT(A)”], Delhi DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1085700569(1), dated 06.02.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘the Act’).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.

2 I.T.A. No. 3786/Del/2026 3. It is evident at the outset with very able assistance coming from the Revenue side that there arises his first and foremost issue of validity of the reopening itself. This is further precise reasons that the learned Assessing Officer had set into motion section 148/147 proceedings for adding amount of Rs. 4,08,326/- which stands deleted in the CIT(A)/NFAC’s lower appellate discussion.

4.

That being the case the Revenue could hardly dispute that once the aforesaid addition forming sole subject matter of the reopening reasons herein stands reversed in the lower appellate proceedings, all other remaining disallowance(s) made in the assessee’s hands could not be held as sustainable in law going by ATS Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 166 taxman.com 61 (Delhi) and Ranbaxy Laboratory CIT (2011) 335 ITR 136 (Del). The impugned reopening itself is accordingly quashed in very terms.

All remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court as on 02.06.2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 17th July, 2026 *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to:

3 I.T.A. No. 3786/Del/2026 (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 →