Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2025) 12 ITAT CK 4791

J.H.P. Ploymers vs Income Tax Officer

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'G', New Delhi · Decided on 16 December 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member · Manish Agarwal, Accountant Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 1663/Del/2025

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

6 paragraphs · 189 words

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066847320(1) dated 19.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

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 27.03.2018 (page 8 in paper boo k) wherein the learned prescribed authority had accepted the Asse ssing Officer’s reopening proposal as “I am satisfied………”. 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 vitiate s the entire reopening; and therefore, we accept the instant legal ground in very terms. T his reopening is quashed therefore.

4.

All other pleadings on mer its stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.