SRI VIVEK KUMAR KAJARIA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., NFAC, DELHI

ITA 174/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 September 2026AY 2019-20206 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 was invalid. The primary reason for reopening was the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 3,50,00,000/-, which was the subject of the notice under Section 148A(d). When the CIT(A) deleted this addition, the very foundation of the reopening was demolished. Consequently, any other additions made by the AO, including the Rs. 5,63,75,000/- on account of share sales, were rendered without valid jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that since the search on the third party, Anil Kumar Kasera, occurred prior to 01.04.2021, and incriminating material was found, the AO was duty-bound to initiate proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, not Section 147/148. The Tribunal relied on the decisions in ACIT vs. Gopal Prasad Gupta and Paras Chandreshbhai Koticha. Accordingly, the notice issued under Section 148 and the assessment framed under Section 147 were quashed. The assessee's appeal was allowed, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Vivek Kumar Kajaria, filed a return for AY 2019-20. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment under Section 147/148 based on information from a search on a third party, Anil Kumar Kasera, which indicated bogus purchases of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- by the assessee. The AO also added Rs. 5,63,75,000/- on account of the sale of shares. The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 3,50,00,000/-. The assessee appealed against the reopening and additions, while the revenue appealed against the deletion. The Tribunal was to decide on the validity of the reopening and the subsequent assessment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 is valid when the addition forming the basis of the show cause notice under Section 148A(d) was deleted by the CIT(A), rendering the entire reopening basis invalid, and consequently, if other additions made by the AO are without jurisdiction. - Assessee's contention: The deletion of the primary addition by the CIT(A) demolishes the basis of reopening, making subsequent additions without valid jurisdiction. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded. 2. Whether, in cases where incriminating material was found during a search on a third party prior to 01.04.2021, the reopening of assessment should have been initiated under Section 153C instead of Section 147/148. - Assessee's contention: The AO was duty-bound to initiate proceedings under Section 153C, not Section 147/148, as the search on the third party occurred before 01.04.2021 and incriminating material was found. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 139(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 132(4),Section 69A,Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR
Hearing: 01.07.2026Pronounced: 28.09.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.174/KOL/2026
I.T.A. No.340/KOL/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

These two appeals preferred by the assessee and revenue are against the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi,(hereinafter referred to as the “ld. CIT(A)”], dated 29.12.2025 for the same Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20. ITA Nos.174&340/Kol/2026/AY 2019-20 Sri Vivek Kumar Kajaria vs. DCIT/ACIT ITA No.174/Kol/2026 (A.Y. 2019

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 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →