QUETZAL BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HARYANA

ITA 6409/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 February 2026AY 2016-1719 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the AO's assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 was based on incorrect facts. The Tribunal noted that the reasons recorded for reopening suffered from factual inaccuracies and a lack of independent application of mind by the AO and the approving authority, thus rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 147/144B, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The primary contention was that the reopening was based on factually incorrect premises, specifically that the assessee had not filed its return of income, which was false as a return was duly filed. The assessee also argued that the reassessment was a result of a 'change of opinion' and 'borrowed satisfaction'.

What were the issues?

Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 when based on incorrect facts and lack of independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 139(1),Section 143(2),Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 69C,Section 234B,Section 151,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD

Hearing: 08.01.2026Pronounced: 17.02.2026

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 26.08.2025 for A.Y. 2016-17. The assessee in its appeal raised following grounds :- “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in passing the impugned re-assessment order u/s 147/144B and that too without assuming juri iction as per law and without complying with mandatory conditions of section 147 to 151A of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any case and in any view of matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in p

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 →