ANKIT ATULKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 485/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 September 2026AY 2019-2012 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were valid. Regarding the grounds challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings (Grounds 1-6), the Tribunal found that the notice under Section 148 was issued within three years when the time granted for reply to the Section 148A notice was excluded, and Proviso 5 to Section 149(1) was considered. Therefore, Section 149(1)(b) was not attracted, and Section 149(1)(a) was applicable, allowing reassessment even if income escaping assessment was less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. The approval under Section 151 was taken from the correct authority (PCIT), and any reference to Section 149(1)(b) in the approval form was a clerical error. The approval was deemed authenticated as per Rule 127A of the IT Rules. The AO followed the procedure under Section 148A, and the conditions for the deeming fiction under Explanation 2(iv) to Section 148 were not met, necessitating the Section 148A procedure. Thus, Grounds 1-6 were dismissed. On Ground 7, concerning the disallowance under Section 80GGC, the Tribunal held that the donation made to the Rashtriya Samajwadi Party was bogus, as evidenced by investigation material, statements recorded under Section 132(4), bank trail analysis, and the established modus operandi of the recipient political party. The assessee failed to establish that the contribution was a genuine donation eligible for deduction. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court judgments in CIT v. Durga Prasad More and Sumati Dayal v. CIT, stating that taxing authorities are not required to wear blinkers and can look beyond apparent transactions. The disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000/- was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Ankit Atulkumar Shah, filed an appeal against the order dated 03/12/2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (CIT(A)). The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal against the assessment order dated 23/01/2025, passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2019-2020. The reassessment proceedings were initiated based on third-party search information. The assessee challenged the validity of these proceedings on multiple grounds, including procedural irregularities in obtaining approval and the applicability of limitation periods. Additionally, the assessee contested the disallowance of a deduction of Rs. 1,00,000/- claimed under Section 80GGC.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act are invalid due to the Assessing Officer (AO) not obtaining prior approval from the competent authority as required under Explanation 2(iv) to Section 148, particularly when the case was reopened based on third-party search information? 2. Whether the reassessment proceedings are unsustainable in law as Section 148A was invoked in circumstances where it was not applicable, especially when the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 was barred by limitation? 3. Whether the AO erred in invoking Section 149(1)(b) when the alleged escapement of income beyond three years from the end of AY 2019-20 did not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/-? 4. Whether the AO erred in obtaining approval under Section 151 from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT), vitiating the reassessment proceedings? 5. Whether the AO erred in relying on an unsigned approval under Section 151, violating Section 282A and the DSC Policy, 2018, rendering the reassessment proceedings void? 6. Whether the assessment order passed by the NFAC is vitiated as the matter emanates from search-related information, for which jurisdiction is conferred upon the Central Circle? 7. Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000/- claimed under Section 80GGC, without properly appreciating the evidence furnished by the assessee? Assessee's Contentions: The reassessment proceedings are invalid due to procedural errors, including lack of proper approval, incorrect invocation of Section 148A, violation of limitation periods under Section 149(1)(b), and obtaining approval from an incompetent authority. The assessment order is void due to lack of jurisdiction. The disallowance of Section 80GGC deduction is unjustified. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue likely supported the findings of the lower authorities, arguing that the reassessment proceedings and the disallowance were valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 149,Section 151,Section 80GGC,Section 282A,Section 132(4),Section 13A,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the Order, dated 03/12/2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] whereby the Learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 23/01/2025, passed under Section 147 of the Income Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] for the Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1.

The Ld. AO has erred in law

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 →