AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, 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/250/2024-25/1071383013(1), dated 19.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It transpires during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost legal issue between parties i.e. validity of the impugned reopening itself. Learned assessing officer had admittedly framed his section 153A r.w.s 143(3) assessment in the assessee’s case on 29.12.2017 in furtherance to the search in issue dated 18.11.2015. The impugned assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 happens to be “unabated” one only wherein any addition has to be mandatorily made based on the specific seized material going by PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC).
A perusal of the case file indicates that the impugned reopening had seen set into motion against the assessee for the purpose of assessing some alleged entries of Rs. 12,26,265/-coming from M/s Pradip Kumar Jindal Group which nowhere formed part of incriminating material in issue. I therefore find merit in assessees’ instant first and foremost legal argument that the impugned reopening is not sustainable in law for this very precise reason. Quashed accordingly.
All remaining pleadings on merits between the parties stand rendered academic.
The assessee’s appeal is allowed.