SAMBHAV PIPES AND FITTINGS,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3185/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 July 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 since the notice issued under Section 148 was set aside by the Bombay High Court, the subsequent reassessment and the penalty levied thereon have no legal basis and must be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged a penalty levied under Section 270A. The penalty was based on a reassessment framed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B, which in turn was based on a notice issued under Section 148.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty levied under Section 270A can survive if the reassessment proceedings, on which it is based, are nullified due to a defective notice under Section 148.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

Pronounced: 10/07/2026

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 08.01.2026 for the Assessment Year 2019-20 in sustaining the penalty of Rs.17,14,440/- levied u/s 270A of the Act.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee, referring to pages 1 to 4 of the paper book, submitted that on a petition filed by the assessee challenging the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on the ground that such notice had been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer, as mandated by law, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in W.P. (L) No. 40898 of 2025, dated 16.12.2025, following the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Hexaware Technologies Limited vs. ACIT, reported in (2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bom.), set aside the impugned notice issued u/s 148 of the Act and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the assessment framed against the assessee u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B, dated 27.02.2025 based on the said notice issued u/s 148 dated 25.04.2023, will not survive.

3.

On hearing both the sides and perusing the order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in W.P. (L) No. 40898 of 2025, dated 16.12.2025, it is observed that the assessee had challenged the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 25.04.2023 on the ground that such notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, following its order in the case of Hexaware Technologies Limited vs. ACIT (supra), had set aside the impugned notice u/s 148 dated 25.04.2023 and all other proceedings emanating therefrom. By virtue of this order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the reassessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 27.02.2025, pursuant to the notice issued u/s 148 dated 25.04.2023, has become null and void. 2

4.

Since the reassessment framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B has become null and void, the penalty levied based on such addition has no legs to stand. Consequently, the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act will not survive. Thus, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty levied u/s 270A for the assessment year 2019-20.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10/07/2026

Sd/- Sd/- MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 10/07/2026 Prabhat Copy to: SAMBHAV PIPES AND FITTINGS, 902, 9TH FLOOR, PRASAD CHAMBERS, TATA ROAD NO 2, NEAR ROXY CINEMA, 1 OPERA HOUSE, CHARNI ROAD, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400004, MAHARASHTRA

ITO WARD 19(3)(1), MUMBAI, ROOM NO 405, 4TH FLOOR, PIRAMAL 2 CHAMBER, LAL BAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400012, MAHARASHTRA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →