ARVIND JAIN,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 5(1)(1), UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5173/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 September 2025AY 2013-14Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)5 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 reopening was invalid because the reason stated for reopening (escapement of income due to under-reported profits) was not the basis for the additions made in the assessment order (bogus purchases).

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the NFAC's order related to assessment year 2013-14, concerning proceedings under Section 147. The core issue was the validity of the reopening itself, as the Assessing Authority cited escapement of income due to under-reported profits but made additions based on alleged bogus purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147/148 were valid when the reason recorded for reopening was not the basis for the additions made in the assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 24.09.2025

Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Arvind Jain, Vs Income Tax Officer, 487, 11nd Floor, Haveli Haider Kuli, Ward-5(1)(1), Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006 Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida-201301 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ACAPJ9132E Assessee by: Sh. S. S. Nagar, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 24.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 24.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077776400(1) dated 25.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It transpires during the course of hearing that there arises first and foremost legal issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself as the learned assessing authority had set into motion section 148/147 proceedings against the assessee recording the sole reason of escapement of income amounting to Rs.3,00,00,000/- representing under reported profits whereas his assessment framed on 26.05.2023 ended up in Arvind Jain disallowing/adding his alleged bogus purchases totaling to Rs.17,41,375/- in question. It is thus clear that the learned assessing authority has nowhere made any addition qua the above sole reason of reopening.

4.

That being the clinching case, I hereby quote ATS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. ACIT (2024) 166 taxmann.com 61 (Delhi), Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. Union of India (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) and CIT vs. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) to quash the impugned reopening for the above precise reason in very terms.

5.

All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →