DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 7(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVIK PRAFULCHANDRA VORA, GUJRAT

ITA 7602/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 February 2026AY 2016-17Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI ( (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 was bad in law due to non-compliance with the provisions of Section 151 regarding the approval of the appropriate authority. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made by the AO under Section 68. The assessee filed a cross-objection challenging the validity of the reassessment notice issued under Section 148.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment notice issued under Section 148, specifically concerning the approval process as mandated by Section 151.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri Jignesh Shah, A/R
For Respondent: Shri Limbasiya Kavan Nareshkumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.02.2026Pronounced: 13.02.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 7602/Mum/2025
C.O. No. 20/Mum/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM:

The present cross appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the Assessee arise out of the order dated 30/09/2025 passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for A.Y. 2016–17. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

2 C.O. No. 20/Mum/2026 “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,25, 756/- made by the AO u/

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 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →