PANKAJKUMAR VASHRAMBHAI KAMANI,RAJKOT vs. ITO WD 2(2)(3), RAJKOT

ITA 802/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 September 2026AY 2019-208 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted inconsistencies between the notice under section 148, the approval under section 151, and the order-sheet entries of the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found it difficult to conclusively determine, based on the available material, whether the approval under section 151 was duly obtained from the competent authority, whether it was granted with reference to the reasons recorded, and whether it validly supported the issuance of the notice under section 148. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, the Tribunal emphasized that prior sanction under section 151 is a substantive jurisdictional safeguard. Due to these material discrepancies and inconsistencies, the Tribunal restored the limited issue of the validity of the reassessment proceedings to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) was directed to examine the complete original assessment/reassessment record, including reasons recorded, proposal for sanction, approval under section 151, notice under section 148, and relevant order-sheet entries, to determine compliance with statutory conditions and safeguards. The Ld. CIT(A) was also directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to both parties. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Pankajkumar Vashrambhai Kamani, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (Ld. CIT(A)) for Assessment Year 2019-20. The Ld. CIT(A) had confirmed the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The AO had disallowed a deduction of Rs. 60,000/- claimed by the assessee under section 80GGC for donations made to Apna Desh Party, alleging it was a bogus donation. The AO's action stemmed from investigation findings related to a bogus donation racket involving registered unrecognized political parties. The assessee had originally declared a total income of Rs. 4,86,280/-. The reassessment proceedings were initiated based on information suggesting the donation was part of an accommodation entry arrangement.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 read with section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are bad in law, without jurisdiction, and liable to be quashed, as contended by the assessee. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of the notice issued under section 148, given the alleged mechanical approval under section 151, incorrect invocation of section 149(1)(b) instead of 149(1)(a), and unsigned/unauthenticated sanction, rendering the reassessment proceedings void ab initio, as argued by the assessee. 3. Whether the reassessment proceedings were initiated solely on generalized third-party information and borrowed satisfaction without independent inquiry or tangible material linking the assessee to alleged accommodation entries, as submitted by the assessee. 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction under section 80GGC amounting to Rs. 60,000/-, despite the donation being made through banking channels to a registered political party with documentary evidence, and without material showing the assessee received cash back or was involved in accommodation entries, as argued by the assessee. The Revenue contended that the Assessing Officer followed the proper procedure to reopen the assessment and that the approval under section 151 was digitally signed, making the reassessment proceedings valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 149,Section 151,Section 80GGC,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 132,Section 132(4),Section 131(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Mehta. Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. SR DR
Hearing: 27/07/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2019-20, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 17.03.2026 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)’] which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short ‘AO’) u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act dated 27.12.2024. 2. Grounds o

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 →