URMILA KEDIA, RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

ITA 597/RPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 August 2026AY 2017-1818 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing Supreme Court judgments on substantial justice. Crucially, the Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings because the approval for reopening was obtained from the Principal Commissioner (PCIT) instead of the higher authorities required for assessments beyond three years, making the entire reassessment invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed with a significant delay. The primary issue revolved around the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO had made an addition on account of undisclosed investment based on a valuation report.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated, specifically concerning the authority that granted approval for reopening beyond the three-year period. Whether the addition on account of undisclosed investment was sustainable in light of the invalid reassessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C. V. BHADANG & SHRI R. K. PANDA

For Appellant: Shri R B Doshi, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rituparna Namdeo, CIT-DR

PER R.K. PANDA, VP:

ITA No.597/RPR/2025 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.03.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. ITA No.598/RPR/2025 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.03.2025 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the Ld. PCIT, Raipur-1 relating to assessment year 2017-18. For the sake of convenience, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order.

2.

There is a delay of 131 days in filing of both the appeals before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit expla

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →