Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 07 ITAT CK 2316

Anita vs ITO, Ward-1, Hissar

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 8 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.5460/Del/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 241 words

ORDER

This appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi order dated 17.4.2026 involving proceedings 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

I come to the assessee’s first and foremost legal ground herein seeking to challenge validity of the reopening itself. This is for the precise reason that the learned Assessing Officer himself makes it clear in his assessment order dated 21.2.2023 that section 148 notice had been issued to the assessee on 31.03.2022 itself by way of email which should received on 1.4.2022 at 2.12 AM.

3.

That being the case, learned counsel invites my attention to page “10” in the assessee’s paper book indicating the said notice to have been actually issued on 1st April, 2022 only. This clinching fact has gone unrebutted from the Revenue side. Meaning thereby that the impugned action of both the learned lower authorities in initiating the reopening herein under the old tax regime on or after 1.4.2021 could not be held as sustainable once the new “law” came into effect in light of Sumanjeet Aggarwal vs. ITO (2022) 143 taxmann.com 11 (Del). I thus quash impugned reopening initiated against the assessee in very terms therefore.

4.

All remaining pleadings on merits, stood rendered academic.

5.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed.