JITENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN,AGRA vs. ITO-2(1)(2), AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 43/AGR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 February 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 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 noted that the reopening was based on an approval from the prescribed authority which stated 'yes, I am satisfied'. Citing the case of CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd., the Tribunal held that such an approval vitiates the entire reopening.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arose against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC. The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment proceedings for want of a valid approval by the prescribed authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 151

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, “DB” BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 12.02.2025Pronounced: 12.02.2025

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises against Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”] Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1050459717(1), dated 06.03.2023, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’].

2.

Heard both parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the main reopening itself for want of a valid approval by the learned prescribed authority u/s 151 of the Act.

4.

Our attention is invited to page 89 in the paper book wherein the learned prescribed authority had accepted the Assessing Officer’s reopening proposal as “yes, I am satisfied”. This being the clinching factual position emanating from the case file we hereby quote CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (56) that such an approval vitiates the entire reopening; and therefore, we accept the instant legal ground in very terms.

5.

All other issue on merits between parties stand rendered academic.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.02.2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →