Optus Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Reopening Quashed for Total Non-Application of Mind – Search Dates, Persons & Reasons Keep Changing
Delhi ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings holding that notices u/s 148 were issued in a mechanical & casual manner, suffering from patent non-application of mind.
For AY 2016-17, Tribunal noted that Assessee was undisputedly a non-searched person, yet AO issued notice u/s 148 stating that a search u/s 132 was initiated in Assessee’s case. Assessment order thereafter referred to entirely different search actions on different persons & different dates, demonstrating complete confusion at jurisdictional stage. ITAT held that such reopening is vitiated ab initio.
For AY 2019-20, show-cause notice u/s 148A(b) merely sought “verification” of a loan transaction, without any allegation of accommodation entry or linkage with search material. However, order u/s 148A(d) shifted the basis to alleged search on Abhishek Kumar Munka (17-09-2021), while final assessment relied upon yet another search on Deepak Aggarwal & Mukesh Kumar (17-12-2021). Tribunal held that constant shifting of foundation between SCN, 148A(d) order & assessment order renders reopening unsustainable.
ITAT concluded that such reassessment proceedings are a classic case of “utter casualness”, not mere procedural irregularity, and therefore both reassessment notices & consequential orders were quashed in entirety, allowing both appeals of the Assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
Both the appeals are preferred by the assessee against the common order dated 10.06.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-30, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in Appeal Nos: CIT(A), (Delhi-30/10653/2018-19)/(Delhi-30/11618/2015-16) arising out of the common order dated 31.03.2024 passed u/s 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Cc-32, New Delhi for AYs: 2016-17 & 2019-20.
