AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1089776695(1), dated 18.10.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Delay of 167 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
Coming to the assessee’s first and foremost legal ground challenging validity of the impugned reopening itself, the tribunal hereby notices from a perusal of the case records that the learned Assessing Officer had set into motion section 148/147 mechanism regarding cash withdrawal of Rs.1,46,20,000/- and cash deposits of Rs.16,94,000/- whereas his assessment framed on 27.03.2024 ended up in invoking section 40A(3) cash expenditure payment disallowance of Rs.73,10,000/- which has been upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
That being the clinching factual position, we hereby quote Ranbaxy Laboratory Vs. CIT (2011) 335 ITR 136 (Del) and CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) holding that such a reopening wherein the learned Assessing Officer does not make any addition qua the sole reason therein; is not sustainable in law. The same stands quashed in very terms therefore.
All other pleadings between the parties on merits stands rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.