KUSUM AGARWAL,NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1039/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 July 2026AY 2015-20164 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 was beyond the period of limitation. The relaxation granted by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) was not available for the assessment year 2015-16, as per Supreme Court and High Court decisions.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed their return of income for AY 2015-16 on March 30, 2015. A notice under Section 148 was issued on July 29, 2022, after the initial notice under Section 148A(b) was deemed issued. The assessee argued this notice was barred by limitation.

What were the issues?

Whether the notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation, considering the applicability of TOLA provisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A(b),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, AR
For Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR
Hearing: 25.06.2026Pronounced: 10.07.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 10.03.2026 for the AY 2015-16.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act is barred by limitation in consonance with ratio laid down by the Hon'ble apex court in the case of Union of India and other Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC), dated 03.10.2024 (SC).

3.

The facts in brief are that the return of income was filed her return of income on 30.03.2015, declaring total income at ₹3,72,140/-. Thereafter, the notice u/s 148 of the Act was

4.

The Ld. Counsel vehemently submitted before us that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by limitation as benefit of TOLA is not available to the assessment year 2015- 16. The assessee relied on in defense of his arguments on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No.8629 of 2024, reported in 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) pronounced on 03.10.2024 which has been followed by Hon’ble Delhi Court in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in WP(C) No. 17639/2022 order dated 13.12.2024 wherein it has been held that reopening of assessment for 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA on and from 01.04.2021. The said decision has been followed by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Orbit Financial Capital, ITA No. 5812/M/2024. The ld. AR submitted that even the Coordinate Bench in the case of Coplama Products Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1806/Kol/2024 pronounced on 31.01.2025 has followed the said decision. Thereafter, the Rajasthan High Court in WP No. 3667 of 2023 vide its order dated 27.01.2025 has taken the similar view. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that

5.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we find that undisputedly, the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 29.07.2022 which falls beyond the period of limitation as the relaxation granted by TOLA w.e.f. 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 is not available in the impugned assessment year as has been held in the case of Rajeev Bansal(supra) by the Hon’ble Apex Court and thereafter the said decision has been followed in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We note that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that the reopening of assessment for Ay 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA on and from 01.04.2021. We also note that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in WP No. 3667 of 2023 dated 27.01.2025 has taken a similar view. Considering the facts of the assessee’s case in the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are inclined to hold that the reopening of assessment is barred by limitation and is accordingly quashed.

6.

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

Order pronounced on 10.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 10.07.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS

Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//

Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →