AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/ S/250/2025-26/1083074346(1) dated 27.11.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
It transpires during the course of hear ing that ther e arises the first and foremost legal issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself as the learned assessing authority had set into motion the impugned proceedings against the assessee regarding the sole reason of total transactions of Rs.38,95,30 ,324/- whereas his assessment framed on 28.12.2018 in questio n e nded up in disallowing/adding commission income of Rs.38 ,95,326/- from undisclosed sources and Rs.4,925/- as interest income .
It is thus clear that the le arned assessing authority has nowhere made any addition qua the above sole reaso n of reopening. That being the clinching case, I hereby quote Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd . vs. Union of India (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) and CIT vs. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) to quash the impugned reopening for the above precise reason in very terms.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court o n 11/02/2026.