INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI vs. SUPER KING INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 9200/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 September 2026AY 2016-1717 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's argument regarding the unsigned approval under Section 151 was rejected as the document was found to be digitally signed. Regarding the additions made by the AO, the Tribunal found that despite several opportunities, the assessee failed to justify the cash receipts by adducing evidence. The Tribunal distinguished the case laws relied upon by the assessee, such as CIT v. Vishal Exports Overseas Limited and CIT v. Smt. Harshil Chordia, stating they were not applicable due to the lack of satisfactory explanation and evidence from the assessee regarding the nature and sources of cash deposits. The Tribunal considered the deletion of additions by the CIT(A) as perverse, as it was done without any evidence to prove the genuineness of the cash receipts. Therefore, the additions made by the AO were upheld. The assessment was finalized with additions under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE.

What were the facts?

The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) who had deleted additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) for Assessment Year 2016-17. The assessee, Super King Investments Pvt. Ltd., initially filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 26,34,110/-. The case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on information regarding high-value cash deposits in various bank accounts totaling Rs. 5,27,43,000/-. The AO made additions of Rs. 5,27,43,000/- and Rs. 26,74,90,000/- under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The CIT(A) had deleted these additions, leading to the present appeal by the Revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as invalid and unsustainable. 2. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the assessing officer had valid reason to believe, based on tangible material, that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and that the reopening was in accordance with law after due approval under section 151 of the Income Tax Act. 3. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the reassessment was based on a mere change of opinion and in quashing the assessment without adjudicating the additions made under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. Assessee's Contention: The approval under Section 151 of the Act was unsigned, rendering the proceedings vitiated. This argument was based on Ground No. 2 of the assessee's appeal before the Tribunal. Revenue's Contention: The reassessment proceedings were valid, initiated with valid reasons based on tangible material and due approval under Section 151. The CIT(A) erred in holding the reassessment as invalid, based on a mere change of opinion, and in quashing the assessment without adjudicating the additions made under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 151,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Chaturvedi, Adv and Shri Nikhil Sharma, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 30/06/2026Pronounced: 28/09/2026

PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-

tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising

out of the Assessment Order dated 25.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi under Section 147 r.w.s.

144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under: - “1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding the reassessment proceedings initiated under sect

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →