ANIL KUMAR SINGH,. vs. ITO WARD-30(5), DELHI, .

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4288/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 August 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was time-barred, as it was issued after the expiry of the limitation period. Consequently, the assessment proceedings arising from this notice were deemed to be without jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenges the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the notice was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was within the statutory limitation period. The validity of the subsequent assessment proceedings was also questioned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

PER SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 30.12.2025, for Assessment Year 2017-18.

Shri Dishnat Sethi, appearing on behalf of the assessee at the outset submits that the 2. reopening of assessment is bad in law as the notice issued u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 29.07.2022 is beyond limitation. He submits that the case of assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, 167 taxmann.com 70/469 ITR 46. The ld. Counsel furnished a table of relevant dates and events to support his contention.

ITA 4288/DEL/2026 ANIL KUMAR SINGH 3. Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department vehemently supported findings of the Assessing Officer (AO) on merits as well as validity of the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act.

4.

Both sides heard, orders of the lower authorities examined. The assessee by way of ground no. 1 of appeal has assailed validity of notice issued u/s.148 of the Act. The ld. Counsel has furnished a table of relevant dates and events, the same is extracted herein below:-

S No. Particulars Date 1. First Notice issued u/s 148 for AY 2017-18 24.06.2021 (PB 14) 2. Period of limitation as per TOLA 30.06.2021 3. Surviving Period 6 days 4. Information provided by AO as per direction in case of Ashish 01.06.2022 (PB 17-18) Agarwal (148A(b) Notice) 5. Time provided to file reply to 148A(b) notice 16.06.2022 (PB 17-18) 6. Assessee filed reply against 148A(b) notice on 16.06.2022 (PB 25-27) 7. Time Limitation for issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act, in view of 23.06.2022 decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal 8. Order u/s 148A(d) passed on (after taking approval of Ld. PCIT) 27.07.2022 (PB 29-32) 9. Notice u/s 148 issued on 29.07.2022 (PB 29-32)

The dates and events given in above table have not been disputed by the Revenue.

5.

From examination of above dates it is evident that the notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 29.07.2022 is time barred, hence, without jurisdiction. The limitation for issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act was 23.06.2022, whereas notice was issued on 29.07.2022. Any proceedings arising from notice without jurisdiction are void ab initio, hence, the assessment made u/s.147 r.ws. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 09.03.2023 is without jurisdiction, hence, quashed.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on Friday the 05th day of June, 2026.

Sd/- VIKAS AWASTHY JUDICIAL MEMBER Delhi Dated: 31-August-2026

ITA 4288/DEL/2026 ANIL KUMAR SINGH Copy to: ANIL KUMAR SINGH, C/O SINGH & ASSOCIATES LAW 1 OFFICE 204, SHARMA COMPLEX, A-2, GURU NANAK PURA, LAXMI NAGAR, DELHI-110092 ITO WARD-30(5), DELHI, 2 ITO WARD-30(5), CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110002 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →