AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the NFAC, Delhi DIN & order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083697079(1) dated 15.12.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
For the reasons stated in the assesses’s condonation averments, delay of 17 days in filing of instant appeal is hereby condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
It transpires with the able assistance coming from the Revenue’s side that the first and foremost issue of validity of impugned reopening itself. This is for the precise reason that the learned Assessing Officer appears set into motion section 148 proceedings against the assessee regarding his “NSEL” exchange platform investment of Rs.23,99,890/- whereas his assessment framed on 28.03.2022 inter-alia added “gross-margin” of Rs. 1,49,156/- and profit of Rs.97,830/-; respectively. This clinching factual position has gone un-rebutted from the Revenue side.
That being the case, I hereby quote Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. Union of India (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) and CIT vs. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) that such reopening itself is not sustainable as the learned Assessing Officer has not made any addition qua the aforesaid sole reopening reason. Quashed accordingly.
All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.
In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed.