SHRI ALOK GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer's reasons for reopening the assessment did not establish a 'reason to believe' that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, as required by Section 147. The reasons only stated a need for scrutiny due to expired limitation.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return of income, but AIR information revealed a cash deposit of Rs. 14,14,000/- in their bank account which was not reflected in the return. A notice under Section 148 was issued to reopen the assessment.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 was valid when the Assessing Officer failed to record a 'reason to believe' that income had escaped assessment, and instead cited expired scrutiny limitations.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH - ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI
Per BHAVNESH SAINI, Judicial Member
ORDER This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 18, New Delhi dated 19th March, 2015 for assessment. Year 2005-06 challenging reopening of assessment u/s 147/148 of I.T. Act and additions of Rs. 14,14,000/- and Rs. 32,59,000/- with interest u/s 234B of Act.
Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income on 31st July, 2005 declaring income of Rs. 3,07,850/-. Information was received through AIR regarding deposit of Rs. 14,14,000/- in bank account of assessee with Central Bank of India. Since the transaction was not reflected in the return of income notice u/s 148 was issued on 22nd May, 2008 and served upon assessee.
The Assessing Officer framed reassessment order and made the additions on account of unexplained deposit with Central Bank of India and unexplained receipt while computing the income at Rs. 49,80,850/- .Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee.
The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment as well as additions on merit in the present appeal.
I have heard Ld. Representative of both the parties and perused the material on record. The validity of reassessment proceedings is to be determined on the basis of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment. Assessee has filed copy of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment at page 34 of paper book. The same reads as under :-
“Shri Alok Gupta Assessment. Year 2005-06 “An AIR information was received from the DAO Ward 31(4)/DAO 45 with the information that the assessee Shri Alok Gupta (AANPG.4929-K) has deposited a cash of Rs. 14,14,000/- during the year i.e. assessment. Year 2005-06 (Central Bank of India).
The information was received in this office only on 6.5.2008.
Since the limitation of this case for making/scrutiny/verification has already been expired on 31/12/2007 therefore in order to verify the genuineness of the transaction, the case is required to be re-opened by issuing a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961.
I am fully satisfied that action is required to take the case for scrutiny for the assessment year 2005-06 therefore notice u/s 148 is issued.”
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. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026