UTILAS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 27(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1404/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 April 2026AY 2012-133 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 ITAT held that the reopening of assessment was not sustainable in law. This was because the additions made were not based on any specific incriminating material found during the search, and the assessment year in question was unabated.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) heard an appeal concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment initiated under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment under Section 147 when the additions were not based on incriminating material and the assessment year was unabated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Adv. (VC)
Hearing: 06.04.2026Pronounced: 06.04.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, 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/250/2024-25/1071383013(1), dated 19.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

ITA No.1404/Del/2026

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost legal issue between parties i.e. validity of the impugned reopening itself. Learned assessing officer had admittedly framed his section 153A r.w.s 143(3) assessment in the assessee’s case on 29.12.2017 in furtherance to the search in issue dated 18.11.2015. The impugned assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2012- 13 happens to be “unabated” one only wherein any addition has to be mandatorily made based on the specific seized material going by PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC).

3.

A perusal of the case file indicates that the impugned reopening had seen set into motion against the assessee for the purpose of assessing some alleged entries of Rs. 12,26,265/- coming from M/s Pradip Kumar Jindal Group which nowhere formed part of incriminating material in issue. I therefore find merit in assessees’ instant first and foremost legal argument that the impugned reopening is not sustainable in law for this very precise reason. Quashed accordingly.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.1404/Del/2026

All remaining pleadings on merits between the parties stand

rendered academic.

4.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 6th April, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 16th April, 2026. Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 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 →