IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Kanha Softech Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Central Circle-I, Plot No.1, Block-E, Sector- Noida

52, Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AACCK5789P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Ved Jain, Adv.

Sh. Ayush Garga, Adv. Ms. Kanishka Garg, CA Department by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of hearing 12.02.2026 Date of pronouncement 12.02.2026

ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s order dated 18.10.2024 passed in case no. CIT(A), Kanpur-4/10273/2014-15, involving proceedings under section

147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 252 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji &

Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3. It transpires during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself which the learned assessing authority set into motion against the assessee vide notice dated 31st March, 2021 (page 23 in the paper- book), which stood served vide email on 01.04.2021 at 7.28 AM (page 22 in the case records).

4. It is in this factual backdrop that the assessee vehemently submits that the impugned reopening is not sustainable in law. The fact that it is deemed to have been initiated under the “New Scheme” than the old one which strongly contested at the Revenue’s behest.

5. That being the case, we find that the instant issue of validity of the impugned reopening is no more res integra in light of the tribunal’s recent order/decision dated 26.09.2025 in ITA No. 4831/Del/2024, DCIT Vs. Suncity Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd.;

reading as under:

“9. Heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. It is seen from the perusal of the page 49 of the PB which is the copy of the mail alongwith which the notice u/s 148 was served upon the assessee on 1st April, 2021. The relevant extract to the mail is reproduced as under:

Dinesh Gupta From: DELHLITO24,1@INCOMETAX.GOV.IN Sent: 01 April 2021 07:28 To: dineshgupta@suncityprojects.com Subject: (ITBA) Notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Attachments: AAICS7928N_Notice us 148 1032078041(1)

31032021.pdf Dear SUNCITY INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED Please find attached the Notice u/s 148 for PAN: AAICS7928N and AY:2015-16.

Please quote your PAN in all future correspondences.

Note:

-This communication is computer generated and may not contain signature. This communication may be treated as compliant with the requirements of Income Tax Rules 127 and 127A.

-Signed copy may be sent separately if not already digitally signed.

-Please quote your PAN in all communications.

- Income Tax Department does not seek any taxpayer information like user name, password, details of ATM, credit cards, etc. Taxpayers are advised not to part with such information on the basis of emails.

10. The fact of receipt of notice u/s 148 by the assessee on 01.04.2021 is further accepted by the AO in the order passed u/s 148A(d) disposing the objections raised by the assessee, wherein the AO has made following observations:

“First of all, it is submitted that the assessee has filed its objection on 09.02.2021 whereas notice u/s.142(1) of the Act was issued on

07.12.2021 seeking specific details in connection with its assessment proceedings.

As far as contention raised by the assessee at point no.8 is concerned, the same is not acceptable in view of the fact that the notice u/s 148 was generated and duly digital signed by the then AO on the very same day ie. 31.03.2021 at 5:51 PM as clear from the plain