SUSHIL KUMARI,DELHI vs. ITO (W) 36(1), DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARAAssessment Year: 2017-18
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:
This assessee’s appeal ITA no. 7076/Del/2025 for assessment year
2017-18 arises against CIT(A)/ NFAC, Delhi’s order dated 15.09.2025 (DIN &
Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080745268(1), in proceedings u/s 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 issue of validity of the impugned reopening herein, it transpires at the outset from a perusal of the learned prescribed authority’s section 151 approval dated 31.03.2021 that it had simply recorded “I find it a fit case …..”, than having applied its independent mind thereupon.
2
3. That being the clinching factual position, I hereby quote PCIT v. Goyanka
Lime & Chemical Ltd. [2015] 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) to quash the impugned assessment itself as such a mechanical approval exercise is not sustainable in law.
Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.
4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in open court on 24.12.2025. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 29.12.2025. *MP*