NIRU ANAND ,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 32(4), DELHI

ITA 3055/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the impugned reopening of assessment was invalid. The reasoning was based on the observation that the approval granted by the prescribed authority under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the Assessing Officer's proposal for reopening was merely mechanical. The authority's recorded satisfaction, "I am satisfied……", did not demonstrate an independent application of mind. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC), which mandates that the prescribed authority must apply its independent mind before granting approval for reopening. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the reopening. As a result of this finding, all other pleadings on merits were rendered academic. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Niru Anand, filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Chennai. The impugned order was passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a delay of 52 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal. The primary issue before the Tribunal concerned the validity of the reopening of assessment. The assessee's counsel pointed out that the approval for reopening, granted by the prescribed authority under section 151 on March 30, 2018, merely stated "I am satisfied……" without demonstrating an independent application of mind.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12 is valid, in light of the approval granted by the prescribed authority under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which allegedly lacked an independent application of mind? Assessee's Contentions: The learned counsel for the assessee argued that the reopening of assessment was invalid. This contention was based on the observation that the approval granted by the prescribed authority under section 151, dated March 30, 2018, to the Assessing Officer's reopening proposal contained a perfunctory statement, "I am satisfied……", indicating a lack of independent application of mind. The assessee relied on the decision in CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC). Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue on this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 151

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: Ms. Kanishka Garg, CA
Hearing: 06.08.2026Pronounced: 06.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 4, Chennai’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1083115805(1), dated 28.11.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 52 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the validity of the impugned reopening itself, which goes to t

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 →