SABKA BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-22(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5758/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2025AY 2015-16Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that notices issued under Section 148 after April 1, 2021, for AY 2015-16, are to be dropped as they fall outside the completion period prescribed under TOLA, 2020. Therefore, the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO was invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee received a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2015-16 on April 9, 2021, after the amendment by the Finance Act 2021. The assessee contends that this notice, issued after the prescribed due date, is invalid.

What were the issues?

Whether a notice under Section 148 issued after the prescribed period, following the amendment by the Finance Act 2021, is valid for AY 2015-16?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144/144B,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan Jha, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Hearing: 07.08.2025Pronounced: 19.08.2025

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated 17.10.2024 for A.Y 2015-16.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144/144B is bad in law and unwarranted without application of mind and reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.

3.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was issued notice u/s 148 of the Act for the year under consideration on 31.03.2021 under the unamended provisions of the Act, However, the same was actually signed, served and issued on 09.04.2021, i.e., after the amendment vide Finance Act 2021.

4.

The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted the copy of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act and contended that the screenshot of properties of the digital signature affixed on such notice clearly depict the date of signing as 09.04.2021 and the screenshot of the income tax portal showing the date of service of such notice as 09.04.2021 has been submitted.

5. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. vs.

Page 2 of 6 Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 5177/2025 wherein it has been held that all the notices u/s 148 of the Act issued beyond 01.04.2021 for the A.Y. 2015-16 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA, 2020, hence the current notice issued and served on 09.04.2021 under the unamended provisions of the Act will have to be quashed in such respect and hence the entire proceedings shall stand vitiated.

6.

The assessee thus prays that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 09.04.2021, i.e., after 31.03.2021, under the unamended provisions of the Act be quashed and the entire proceedings in such respect be dropped for the same being bad at law as covered by the aforementioned judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

7.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

8.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Steel and Power Ltd [supra], referring to para 19(f) of the Page 3 of 6 decision of UOI v Rajeev Bansal 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693(2024), has held as under:

“19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-

2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.”

5.

As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decision that is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is required to be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so far as the present litigation is concerned is dated 25.6.2021.”

9.

The fact of the instant case shows that though the notice u/s 148 is dated 31.03.2021, the notice was issued on 09.04.2021 which is evident from the digital signature affixed to the notice. The notice u/s 148 was actually signed, issued and served on 09.04.2021 i.e., after the amendment vide Finance Act, 2021, which shows that the notice was issued beyond the prescribed time of 31.03.2021. The hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Steel and Power Ltd (supra) mandates that all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 will have to be dropped as they will not be Page 4 of 6 covered under TOLA. In view of the same, we are of the considered opinion that in the facts of the instant case, the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO is invalid and deserves to be quashed. Moreover, this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court [supra]. Ground 1 is allowed.

10.

As the appeal is decided on the issue of assumption of jurisdiction, no adjudication on ground 2, 3 and 4 is being expressed. is allowed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 19.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →