OM PRAKASH,ROORKEE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROORKEE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 20/DDN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 January 2026AY 2008-2009Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 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 JCIT's approval for reopening was invalid because it was granted mechanically, stating 'approval for issue of notice... is hereby accorded' without applying independent mind. Citing CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd., the tribunal concluded that all reopenings were non-est in law and quashed them.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed five appeals against the CIT(A)/NFAC orders for assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-13, which arose from reopening proceedings under sections 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The core issue was the validity of the reopening approvals granted by the JCIT, Haridwar Range, Haridwar.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the validity of the reopening assessments due to the mechanical approval granted by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax without independent application of mind.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

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, DEHRADUN “SMC” BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 13.01.2026Pronounced: 13.01.2026

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: These assessee’s five appeals ITA Nos. 20 to 24/DDN/2021 for assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders dated. 04.05.2021 (for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11) and 05.05.2021 (for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) having DINs and Orders no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1032769797(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1032769738(1), ITBA/NFAC/S /250/2021-22/1032769674(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021- 22/1032782247(1), involving proceedings under sections 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

2.

It emerges during the course hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned identical reopening(s) herein as the learned prescribed authority i.e. JCIT, Haridwar Range, Haridwar had accorded its approval thereto on 25th March, 2015 as on the basis of reasons as admitted in your proposal/approval “for issue of notice ……………….. is hereby accorded” than having applied its independent mind thereupon. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd., (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) to conclude that all these reopening(s) based on the learned JCIT’s identical approval are non-est in the eyes of law. Quashed in very terms. All other remaining pleadings between the partes stand rendered academic.

4.

These assessee’s five appeals ITA Nos.20 to 24/DDN/2021 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 13th January, 2026 (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 19th January, 2026. RK/-

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →