AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
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 approval date d 10.05.2016 (page 1 in paper boo k) wherein the learned prescribed authority had accepted the Asse ssing Officer’s reopening pro posal as “Yes” only than having applied it’s independe nt 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 mer its stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.