Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2010-11 arose against the order of the CIT(A) in proceedings under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issue was the validity of the reopening for want of valid approval from the prescribed authority under Section 151.
Held
The Tribunal held that the approval for reopening was mechanical and lacked independent application of mind by the prescribed authority. Citing the decision in CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd., the Tribunal concluded that such mechanical approval vitiates the reopening.
Key Issues
Whether the reopening of assessment was valid when the approval by the prescribed authority under Section 151 was mechanical and lacked independent application of mind.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3), 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
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 ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Bindal Smelting Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, 987, 1st Floor, Hardhiyan Singh Road, Central Circle-1, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi-110005 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACB5260C Assessee by : Sh. Shivam Garg, Adv. & Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 15.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11, arises against the CIT(A)-23, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073991084(1) dated 04.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the reopening itself for want of a valid approval by the learned prescribed authority u/s. 151 of the Act. The tribunal’s attention is invited to the Bindal Smelting Pvt. Ltd. approval dated 10.05.2016 (page 1 in paper book) wherein the learned prescribed authority had accepted the Assessing Officer’s reopening proposal as “Yes” only than having applied it’s independent mind.
This being the clinching factual position emanating from the record, we hereby quote CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC) that such a mechanical approval vitiates the entire reopening; and therefore, we accept the instant legal ground in very terms. The impugned reopening is quashed therefore.
All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.