ANISH THAKORE,AHMEDBAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1878/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 October 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under section 148 was barred by limitation and was therefore invalid in law. The admitted facts were that the assessment year was 2019-20, the alleged escaped income was Rs.53,000/-, and the notice under section 148 was issued on 20.04.2023. Even after considering the period granted to the assessee for responding to the notice under section 148A(b), which extended up to 19.04.2023, the notice under section 148 was issued after this date. Consequently, the reassessment order dated 17.03.2025, passed under section 147 read with section 144B, was annulled. The ratio of this decision is that a notice under section 148 issued beyond the prescribed limitation period under section 149 renders the entire reassessment proceedings invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Anish Thakore, filed an appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC, Delhi) for Assessment Year 2019-20. The original return declared a total income of Rs.3,74,180/-. Proceedings under section 148A were initiated concerning a donation of Rs.53,000/- claimed as a deduction. A notice under section 148A(b) was issued on 29.03.2023, with a response deadline of 17.04.2023. An order under section 148A(d) was passed, followed by a notice under section 148 on 20.04.2023. The reassessment was completed on 17.03.2025, determining total income at Rs.4,27,180/- by disallowing the Rs.53,000/- deduction. The assessee challenged the validity of the section 148 notice on grounds of limitation under section 149.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, and the issuance of notice under section 148 are procedurally valid, considering the grounds of appeal raised before the CIT(A) and the subsequent disallowance of Rs.53,000/-? Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the proceedings under section 147 and the notice under section 148 were procedurally invalid. Specifically, the assessee contended that the notice under section 148 was barred by limitation under section 149 of the Act. The assessee also argued that the reassessment proceedings should have been quashed and the assessment annulled as void ab initio, and that the disallowance of Rs.53,000/- should not have been upheld. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the Revenue regarding the procedural validity of the notice or the limitation period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 149,Section 250,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Thaker, AR
For Respondent: Shri Drop Singh Meena, Sr. DR
Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 01.10.2026

PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:

-

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated 31.07.2025, under section 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that reopening u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of notice u/s. 148 is procedurally valid and in dismissing

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →