AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Addl/ JCIT(A)-4, Chennai order dated 14.01.2026 passed in case no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1084763583(1), involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the validity of the impugned reopening itself, which goes to the root of the matter. This is for the precise reason that the learned counsel representing assessee has invited my attention to the prescribed authority’s section 151 approval dated 30.03.2019 to the Assessing Officer’s reopening proposal, wherein, he has recorded “I am satisfied………” than having applied its independent mind thereupon.
Thus, I am of the considered view that the impugned reopening itself is invalid since based on a mere mechanical approval of the said prescribed authority in light of CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) to quash the same in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.