INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-58(3), DELHI vs. SHRI RAM MANUFACTURES, DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARAAssessment Year: 2012-13
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:
This Revenue’s appeal ITA no. 6760/Del/ /2025 for assessment year
2012-13 arises against CIT(A)/ JCIT(A)-1, Mumbai’s order dated 01.09.2025
(DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1080239778(1), in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself for want of proper approval by 2 the learned prescribed authority dated 30.03.2019 u/s 151 of the Act. This is for the precise reason that the assessee has set into motion rule 27 of the ITAT Rules to this effect since the learned prescribed authority has approved the Assessing Officer’s impugned reopening proposal as “I am satisfied …..” than having applied his independent mind which forms a mandatory condition as per CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC) that such a mechanical approval vitiates the entire reopening proceedings. Faced with this situation I hereby reject the Revenue’s vehement contentions to annul the reopening in question as an invalid one. Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.
3. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.
Order pronounced in open court on 27.11.2025. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 28.11.2025. *MP*