BHAVIKA BHUWALKA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA, NOIDA

ITA 8258/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 January 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI C.N. PRASAD (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the sanction granted by the PCIT for issuing the notice under Section 148 was invalid because it was undated and did not reflect an independent application of mind, rendering the notice and subsequent assessment void. The Tribunal also noted that the addition on merits was unsustainable as no sale of shares had taken place.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment for AY 2013-14 was reopened via a notice under Section 148. The assessee contended that the sanction for this notice under Section 151 was invalid as it was undated and lacked proper application of mind by the PCIT. Additionally, the assessee argued that the addition made on account of share purchases was unjustified as no sale had occurred.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 due to improper sanction under Section 151, and the justification of the addition made on account of share purchases without sale.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151,Section 147,Section 10(38),Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(8)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: 05.01.2026Pronounced: 30.01.2026

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 vide order dated 15.10.2025 for the A.Y. 2013-14. 2. The assessee in her appeal raised following grounds :- “1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order u/s 250 of the Income tax Act passed by CIT(A), NFAC is not sustainable on facts and same is bad in law.

1.

2 That the CIT(A) having failed to afford proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard, the Impugned order is in violation of principles and natural justice and thus null and void.

2.

1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the validity of notice u/s 148 of the Act even though same was issued without recordi

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →