AVADH PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7699/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 April 2026AY 2017-184 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 for AY 2013-14 was invalid as the notice was issued on April 1, 2021, falling under the new scheme. For the other two assessment years, the reopening was quashed due to mechanically obtained approvals dated before the new scheme's cut-off date.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the validity of reopening of assessment for AYs 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2017-18. The Section 148 notice for AY 2013-14 was issued on April 1, 2021, after the new scheme for reopening came into effect. For the other two assessment years, the Section 151 approvals were recorded mechanically and dated prior to the new scheme's effective date.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment under the old scheme when the notice was issued after the new scheme's commencement. Another issue concerned the validity of Section 151 approvals obtained mechanically and dated prior to the new scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 143(3),Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Adv
Hearing: 15.04.2026Pronounced: 29.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7697, 7698 & 7699/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18

Vs. DCIT Central Circle-6 Avadh Projects Private Limited Aaykar Bhawan, New Delhi-06 A-3, 7th Floor, Madhusudan Apartments, P-18 Dobson Lane, Howrah-711101 West Bengal PAN: AABCG9673P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. Department by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Adv. Date of hearing 15.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 29.04.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s three appeals ITA Nos. 7697, 7698 & 7699/Del/2025 for assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2017-18, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 24 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s as many orders, dated 25.09.2025, 25.09.2025 & 24.09.2025 passed in DIN No. ITBA/APL/M/2025-26/1081159211(1), ITBA/APL/M/250/2025- 26/1081160399(1) & ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1081126333(1),

ITA No.7697 to 7699 /Del/2025

involving proceedings 147 r.w.s. 143(3), 147 r.w.s. 143(3) & 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

We come to the assessee’s first and foremost identical legal ground in all of its instant three cases seeking to challenge validity of the as many reopening herein. This is for the precise reason that the learned Assessing Officer himself makes it clear in his assessment order dated 31st March, 2021 for A.Y. 2013-14 that section 148 notice had been issued to the assessee on 31.03.2021 itself.

3.

That being the case, learned counsel invites our attention to page “43A” in the assessee’s paperbook indicating the said notice to have been actually issued on 1st April, 2021 only i.e. the date from which the new scheme u/s 148A came into effect. This clinching fact has gone unrebutted from the revenue side. We thus quote Sumanjeet Aggarwal vs. ITO (2022) 143 taxmann.com 11

2 | P a g e

ITA No.7697 to 7699 /Del/2025

(Del) to quash the impugned reopening under the “old” scheme indicated “on or after 01.04.2021” in very terms.

4.

The outcome of the assessee’s latter twin appeals 7698 & 7699/Del/2025 would be hardly any different. We are observing this in the light of the fact that the learned prescribed authorities’ corresponding section 151 approvals dated 31st & 26th March, 2021; assessment year wise respectively, had been recorded mechanically than with due application of mind which has been held as not substantiable in CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd . (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC). We, further wish to make it clear that the said twin approvals are also not covered under the newly introduced amendments in the act since dating back prior to the cut-off dated 1st April, 2021 therein. We thus accept the assessee’s identical legal ground in its instant latter twin appeals to quash the impugned re-openings in very terms as well.

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

3 | P a g e

ITA No.7697 to 7699 /Del/2025

5.

These assessee’s three appeals i.e. ITA Nos. 7697 to 7699/Del/2025 are allowed in the above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case file.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.04.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

4 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →