OMEGA ITECH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA

ITA 3253/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Omega ITECH Services Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida, concerning the reopening of its assessment for the year 2011-12. The reopening was challenged on the grounds that it did not meet the criteria set under the first proviso to section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the original return had fully and truly disclosed all material facts. The Tribunal considered the arguments and evidence presented, including the original return, the search assessment, and the specific questionnaire issued by the Assessing Officer, and concluded that the reopening was unjustified due to the absence of any new tangible material.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26148 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: Ratnabhumi Developers Vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 55 (Gujarat)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMAR JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: VED JAIN
• Keywords: Tangible material
• Section: 147; 143(3); 153A; 72

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3253/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Omega ITECH Services Pvt. Ltd., A-10, B-1, Third Floor, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Badarpur SO (South Delhi), Jaitpur, South East Delhi, New Delhi Vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida PAN :AABCO0520H (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Noida’s order dated 20.06.2024 passed in case no. CIT(Appeal) Kanpur-4/10583/2018-19 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Assessee by Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Department by Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR Date of hearing 20.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.01.2025 ITA No. 3253/Del/2024 2 | P a g e 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. Learned counsel invites our attention to the assessee’s legal ground challenging the validity of the impugned reopening itself as hit by section 147 1st proviso since the Assessing Officer’s corresponding reopening reasons (pages 25 to 28) had nowhere treated the facts of the case as an instance of the appellate having failed to disclosed all the relevant facts “fully” and “truly” in the return followed by scrutiny/search assessment, framed in it’s case on 25.12.2013. 4. Faced with this situation, we duly afforded adequate opportunity to the department to rebut the assessee’s foregoing legal argument. It is submitted at the Revenue’s behest that the Assessing Officer had duly recorded his satisfaction quoting the assessee’s above failure in 5th para at page 27, and, therefore, we ought to uphold the same in very terms. 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival pleadings and find no reason to express our agreement with the impugned reopening, inter alia, in light of the clinching facts emanating from the case file that the assessee-company had filed its original return on 25th December, 2013 declaring income of ITA No. 3253/Del/2024 3 | P a g e Rs.45,470/- which followed the department’s search action on 22nd March, 2012 leading to initiation of section 153A proceedings on 12.12.2013 and culminating in the corresponding regular search assessment framed on 14.03.2014. Learned counsel further invites our attention to the assessee’s detailed paper-book running into 72 pages; and, more particularly, the Assessing Officer’s specific questionnaire dated 02.01.2014 (based on seized material). He further refers to the assessment discussion that the Assessing Officer had duly considered all the assessee’s unsecured loans as well as confirmations etc. in course thereof, and, therefore, there is no fresh tangible material discovered by the department whilst setting into motion the relevant proceedings herein under section 148/147 of the Act. 6. All these clinching averments have gone unrebutted from the department side. We thus quote Ratnabhumi Developers Vs. ACIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 55 (Gujarat) that such a reopening in absence of afresh tangible material does not deserve to be concurred with and quash the same in the given facts before us. Ordered accordingly. The assessee succeeds in the instant first and foremost substantive ground in very terms. ITA No. 3253/Del/2024 4 | P a g e 6. All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic. 7. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20th January, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "