Pawan Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s order dated 14.03.2024 passed in case no. NFAC/2016-17/10124891, involving proceedings under section147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

It transpires at the outset, during the course of hearing that the assessee’s instant appeal has been restored for our limited adjudication of his second and third additional grounds as per the learned co-ordinate bench’s order dated 20.02.2026 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 140/Del/2025.

It is in this factual matrix that we hereby confine our adjudication to these twin limited issues.

Mr. Sahu at this stage reiterates the assesses pleadings in his second and third additional grounds that not only the Assessing Officer had issued section 148 notice dated 31.03.2021 before recording his reasons to believe thereafter on 16.07.2021 but also it is a clear cut instance of lack of valid approval of the prescribed authority u/s 151 of the Act, respectively.

We now deal with the Assessee’s foregoing twin contentions. A perusal of the case records reveals on pages 14 to 16 suggests that the Assessee had been furnished the impugned reopening reasons by the Learned Assessing Officer after issuance of section 148 notice so as to comply with the hon’ble apex court’s landmark directions in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd., ITO, 259 ITR 19 (SC). It is thus not a case of recording of reopening reasons post-facto issuance of section 148 notice but that of furnishing of the said reasons to the assessee. We, thus reject the assessee’s instant former additional ground in very terms.

Next comes the assessee’s latter additional ground citing lack of the statutory approval u/s 151 of the Act. Mr. Sahu, concedes very clearly that he does not have the said approval in his paper book. His case at the best is we should either adjourn the matter so as to enable him to obtain the same or the department may be directed to produce it on the next date of hearing. We see no merit in either of the assessee’s twin contentions as it is mandatory going by NTPC (supra) as well as All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 21 taxmann.com 429 (Mum.) that this tribunal could admit such an additional ground so as to determine the correct tax liability of taxpayer subject to the rider that all the relevant facts form part of records. We make it clear at the cost of repetition that the assessee has already been found wanting in placing on record the foregoing section 151 approval. We thus, hold that his second additional ground herein is very devoid of merits which fails in very terms.

This assesse’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.