BABA BISHAMBER BRICKS,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, WAR4D-3(5), SAHARANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1042/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 January 2025AY 2013-14Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 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 held that the approval for reopening the assessment was invalid as the prescribed authority had not applied its mind. Consequently, the reopening was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was filed against an order passed under Section 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act. The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment due to a non-application of mind by the authority granting approval.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 147,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 01.01.2025Pronounced: 01.01.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14, arises against the order of CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar dated 14.11.2017 in case No. 6945-9198-0260-317, in proceedings u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming straightaway to the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself, it emerges from the learned prescribed authority’s approval granted on 19.02.2016 to the Assessing Officer reopening reasons that it had not applied it’s mind whilst recording “yes I am satisfied………”.

4.

This being the clinching factual position emerging from the case, I hereby quote CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2016) 237 Taxman 378 (SC) to quash the impugned reopening 4.1 All other pleadings in the instant case stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 01/01/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →