JAGDAMBEY INTERNATIONAL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-34(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3953/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 December 2025AY 2018-193 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 section 148A proceedings were invalid because the notice issued to the assessee provided less than the statutory seven days for a reply. Consequently, the reopening of the assessment was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns assessment year 2018-19 and challenges proceedings under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income-tax Act. A key issue was the short notice period provided for the section 148A proceedings.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the section 148A proceedings due to an insufficient notice period. The Tribunal also considered the implications of this on the subsequent reopening of the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148A

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: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Monalisa Maity, Adv
Hearing: 10.12.2025Pronounced: 24.12.2025
1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, 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/250/2025-26/1076326230(1), dated 20.05.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.ws. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned section 148A proceedings itself as the learned assessing authority had issued its corresponding notice dated 23rd March, 2022 to be replied by 29th March itself as per the clinching factual position emanating from para 7.2 page 17 of the lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, we hereby quote (2023) 153 taxmann.com 70 (Bom.) Mukesh J. Ruparel vs. Income-tax Officer that such a reopening giving less than seven days statutory time period is not sustainable in the eyes of law, to quash the same in very terms. All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits 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 →