Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Date of hearing 24.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.11.2025 ORDER
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, 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/250/2025-26/1076282719(1), dated 19.05.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Coming to the assessee’s first and foremost legal ground challenging validity of the impugned reopening itself, the tribunal hereby notices from a perusal of the case records that the learned Assessing Officer had set into motion section 148/147 mechanism regarding cash deposits of Rs.41,57,500/- whereas his assessment framed on 31st December, 2018 ended up in adding capital gains of Rs.95,00,228/- which has been upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
That being the clinching factual position, we hereby quote Ranbaxy Laboratory Vs. CIT (2011) 335 ITR 136 (Del) and CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) that such a reopening wherein the learned Assessing Officer does not make any addition qua the sole reason therein; is not sustainable in law. The same stands quashed in very terms therefore. All other pleadings between the parties on merits stands rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th November, 2025