ALOK BANSAL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 44(6), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8049/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 January 2026AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the reopening was based on information not pertaining to the assessee, lacking any tangible material to form the basis of the impugned reopening. Therefore, the reopening was not sustainable in law.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC for AY 2019-20, which involved proceedings under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer initiated reopening based on information concerning a different individual, Sh. Gurdeep Singh Kartar Singh, rather than the assessee, Sh. Alok Bansal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Tarun Chanana, Adv
Hearing: 19.01.2026Pronounced: 19.01.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082752286(1), dated 19.11.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the first and foremost legal issue between the parties regarding validity of the impugned reopening, this tribunal hereby notices from the perusal of the learned Assessing Officer’s reopening reasons at page 25 to 27 enclosed with section 148A notice dated 25th March, 2023 that what all he had done was to proceed on the basis of some information regarding Sh. Gurdeep Singh Kartar Singh than the appellant, namely, Sh. Alok Bansal. It thus turns out to be a case which is lack of any tangible material or information pertaining to the assessee forming basis of the impugned reopening which could not be held sustainable in law. Quashed accordingly. All other pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →