Reopening Beyond limitation – Mechanical Approval Fatal – Entire Batch Collapses

DCIT Vs Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT Delhi upheld CIT(A) and dismissed Revenue’s appeal for AY 2012-13, holding reopening time-barred despite search in Feb-2022. Applying the first proviso to s.149(1)(b) and the Supreme Court ruling in Rajeev Bansal, the Tribunal held that for AYs prior to 2021-22, limitation must be tested under the old regime. On that yardstick, AY 2012-13 was already dead; the extended 10-year window under the new law cannot revive a barred year.

For the remaining years AYs 2013-14 to 2022-23, the Tribunal struck down assessments on an even stronger ground: invalid approval u/s 148B. A single, consolidated approval was granted for multiple years, on the same day, without examining seized material or appraisal report—clearly mechanical and without application of mind. The Tribunal held s.148B to be pari materia with s.153D; approval must be year-specific, conscious and informed. Omnibus approval vitiates the entire exercise.

Result:

– Revenue appeal for AY 2012-13 dismissed as barred by limitation.

– Assessee appeals for AYs 2013-14 to 2022-23 allowed; assessments quashed in limine due to mechanical approval u/s 148B.

– Merits rendered academic.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI

The captioned appeals are filed by Assessee and Revenue against the separate orders, all are dated 28.02.2025 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ in short] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] arising out of Assessment Orders, passed for various Assessment Years from 2012-13 to 2022-23 which are tabulated as under:

2. As all the captioned appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are having common issues which are inter-linked, inter-connected and this fact has been admitted by both the parties during the course of hearing before us, therefore, all the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are taken together and decided by a common order.