Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 06 ITAT CK 1745

Rajesh Gupta vs ITO, Ward 47(1)

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 24 June 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member · Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.280/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

3 paragraphs · 226 words

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.12.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084093412(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 24.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department for AY: 2017-18.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that on account of alleged bogus sales addition was made which has been sustained by ld. CIT(A) but the issue canvassed before us is that the requisite sanction of the prescribed specified authority u/s 148A(D) r.w.s 148 has not been taken and in this regard, we find admittedly approval u/s 151 of the Act has been taken from Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-10, Delhi. The assessment year involved is 2017-18 and in the light of aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ashish Aggarwal SCC Online SC 543 for the relevant assessment year the prescribed authority to give approval was Pr. CIT. Ld. DR could not disputed aforesaid facts and proposition of law cited, thus, we are inclined to sustain corresponding ground. The appeal of the assesse is allowed and the impugned reassessment proceedings and consequent assessment are quashed.