CHANDRANI COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 13(1), , KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the PCIT's approval for reopening under Section 151 was mechanical, thus rendering the notice under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment invalid. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that no notice under Section 143(2) was issued after the assessee complied with the Section 148 notice, which is mandatory for assuming jurisdiction.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a 'Nil' income return, and the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on information about accommodation entries. An addition of Rs. 84,00,000/- was made. The reopening was based on an approval from the PCIT which was considered mechanical and without application of mind.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment was validly initiated when the approval under Section 151 was mechanical? Whether the assessment is valid when no notice under Section 143(2) was issued after compliance to Section 148 notice?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 151,Section 250,Section 143(2),Section 139(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM
The present appeal filed by the assessee arise from order dated 30.01.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter referred to “the Ld. CIT(A)] for AY 2012-13. 2. The issue raised in Ground No. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming reopening of assessment when the approval u/s 151 of the Act was mechanical in nature.
2 Chandrani Commotrade Pvt. Ltd.
The facts i
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.
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026