TEWATIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8687/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 August 2026AY 2019-204 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 initiating fresh reassessment proceedings while existing ones are pending is without jurisdiction. The second notice was therefore unsustainable in law.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged reassessment proceedings initiated by a notice under Section 148 dated March 21, 2024. This was done while earlier reassessment proceedings, initiated by a notice dated April 13, 2023, were still pending.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment proceedings can be initiated by a fresh notice under Section 148 when prior reassessment proceedings for the same assessment year are already pending and not terminated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Shri Lalit Mohan Jindal, CIT(DR)
Pronounced: 07.08.2026

PER SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 13.11.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1082601160(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 31.03.2025 u/s 147 the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ACIT, CC-32, for AY: 2019-20.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that assesse has taken recourse to Rule 11 of the ITAT Rules and has raised additional legal and jurisdictional ground on which ground No. C has been pressed for disposal and the same reproduced below:

“C. That the reassessment proceedings initiated vide issue of notice u/s 148 dated 21.03.2024 from ACIT Circle 25(1) Delhi is without jurisdiction as initiated in multiplication and duplication of already continuing reassessment proceedings u/s 148 of same subject year before faceless assessment unit without valid termination of the same before start of another proceedings under same section by issue of reassessment notice.”

2.1 As the said ground is a legal ground and can be decided on the basis of facts before us, the same is admitted for hearing. 3. During hearing ld. Counsel has drawn our attention to the paper book wherein at page No. 42 copy of a notice dated 21.03.2024 u/s 148 of the Act has been provided and at page No. 13 copy of another notice u/s 148 dated 13.04.2023 is provided and it is submitted that while the reassessment proceedings by virtue of notice dated 13.04.2023 were pending fresh notice u/s 148 has been issued on 21.03.2024. In this context, our attention has also been drawn to notice dated 09.08.2024 u/s 142(1) of the Act and dated 29.01.2025 which according to ld. Counsel are part of the on going reassessment proceedings, arising out of notice dated 13.04.2023. It was thus, contended that during pendency of earlier reassessment proceedings the impugned reassessment proceedings have been initiated by notice dated 21.03.2024 and same are not sustainable in law. In this context, ld. Counsel has relied Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision in case of CIT Vs. Sanjay Kumar Garg in ITA No. 92/2012 order dated 02.9.2015 wherein Hon’ble High Court has laid down as follows:

“11. In Nilofer Hameed v. Income Tax Officer (1999] 235 ITR 161 (Ker) after referring to a number of judgments of the High Courts, it was held by the Kerala High Court that 'if an 2 assessment is pending either by way of original assessment or by way of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer cannot issue a notice under Section 148 but if no proceedings are pending either by way of original assessment or by way of reassessment, he can issue a notice under Section 148 within the time mentioned. 12. In the present case, the time limit for completing the reassessment proceedings pursuant to the notice issued on 23rd September 2005 was 31st December 2006. As is evident from the narration hereinabove, the reassessment proceedings were in progress and were being adjourned from time to time. Without those proceedings having come to an end a fresh reassessment could not have been initiated by the AO by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act on 24th November 2006. The proceedings initiated by the notice dated 23rd September 2005 ought to have been completed within the time stipulated and till such time there was no occasion to initiate fresh reassessment proceedings by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act.”

4.

In this context, he also relied Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision in case of Marwadi Shares and Finance Ltd. Vs. DCIT in Special Civil Application No. 17698/2017 order dated 07.03.2018 (2018) 304 CTR 899. 5. Ld. DR could not dispute aforesaid facts and proposition of law leading to only consequence, that the additional ground as raised deserves to be sustained and accordingly ordered. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is quashed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- RENU JAUHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Delhi Dated: 07.08.2026 Copy to: TEWATIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, FLAT NO. 102B, BLOCK-A, FIRST FLOOR, 1 ASHOK VIHAR PHASE-2, DELHI, NEW DELHI-110052, DELHI

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, 2 -, NEW DELHI-110002, DELHI

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 →