ANIL AGRAWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 was issued beyond the surviving time limit and that the approval for reassessment was not obtained from the appropriate authority as required by Section 151. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee was found to have received accommodation entries for fictitious purchases amounting to Rs. 5,91,23,537. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment and made additions based on this information. The assessee challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the reassessment proceedings are valid when the notice under Section 148 is time-barred and the approval under Section 151 is not obtained from the prescribed authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
PER R.K. PANDA, VP:
The above 2 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 04.01.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively. For the sake of convenience, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of trading of grains. He filed his return of income on 27.09.2016 declaring total income of Rs.14,69,400/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 30.10.2018. Subsequently, info
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026