Copy-Paste Reasons Sink Reassessment: Delhi ITAT Quashes Reopening for Non-Application of Mind

Manujendra Shah Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

Copy-Paste Reasons Sink Reassessment: Delhi ITAT Quashes Reopening for Non-Application of Mind

The Delhi ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings against Manujendra Shah for AY 2012-13, holding that the very assumption of jurisdiction under Sections 147/148 was invalid due to defective reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer.

The assessee challenged the reopening on the ground that the reasons recorded for initiating reassessment reflected non-application of mind. During the hearing, it was pointed out that an identical issue had already arisen in the assessee’s own case for AY 2011-12, where the Delhi High Court had held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer suffered from serious infirmities, including failure to apply the correct legal provisions and failure to properly examine the material relating to the fair market value of land as on 01.04.1981.

The Tribunal examined the reasons recorded for AY 2012-13 and found that they were substantially similar in content and substance to those which had already been disapproved by the Delhi High Court in the preceding year. The assessee successfully demonstrated that the same defects persisted in the impugned reopening.

Following the High Court’s findings in the assessee’s own case, the ITAT held that the reopening proceedings were vitiated by lack of proper application of mind. Consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction under Sections 147/148 was declared invalid and the consequential assessment order was held to be void.

Since the reassessment itself was quashed, the Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal without examining the merits of the additions.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI

This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 17.09.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1080839372(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 25.12.2019 u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ACIT, Ward-52(1), for AY: 2012-13.

2. On hearing both sides we find that ld. Counsel for the assesse has primarily questioned the assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of reasons required to be recorded for the purpose of assessment u/s 147/148 of the Act being vitiated and ld. DR has defended the same by submitting that the reasons are illustrative and have all the relevant facts.

3. We find from the submissions that in regard to AY: 2011-12 which happens to be the preceding Assessment Year similar plea was raised on behalf of the assesse before Hon’ble Delhi High Court by way of Writ Petition (C) 12677/2018 and by order dated 18.07.2023, Hon’ble High Court had observed that the reasons as recorded depict non-application of mind by assessing officer, both with regard to provisions which are applicable in the instant case and also insofar as his failure to secure the material that was available with the DCIT in arriving at the market value of the land as on 01.04.1981, which, as noticed form basis of cost of acquisition.

4. Copy of reasons recorded in present assessment year are provided at page No. 10-14 of the paper book and ld. Counsel has successfully demonstrated that the reasons as stand recorded in AY: 2012-13 are similar in content and substance which have been examined by Hon’ble High Court in regard to AY: 2011-12. That being the state of affairs, we are inclined to sustain the ground No.1 and consequently hold that assumption of jurisdiction for assessment u/s 147/148 of the Act is vitiated and consequential assessment order is void. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with a consequence to follow as above.

Order pronounced in the open court on 03.06.2026