ASIA PACIFIC RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid because there was a disconnect between the information received, the reasons recorded, and the actual addition made. The reassessment order was quashed as the foundation for reopening was not established.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessee's assessment based on information that the assessee received Rs. 6 crores as an accommodation entry from M/s. Ayan Trading Co. However, the AO ultimately made additions for alleged bogus purchases from M/s. SP Trading Company and M/s. Patel Trading Company.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment was valid when the addition made was on account of different transactions than those forming the basis of the reasons recorded.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These two appeals are filed by the Assessee against separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] both dated 23.12.2025 for the Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2013-14 and 2014-15 in the proceeding u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as “the Act”]. As the issues involved in these two appeals are identical, both the matters were heard together and are being disposed of vide this common order for the sake of convenience. We w
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 →- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026