NARAYANA SRINIVASA,MANDYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, MANDYA, MANDYA

ITA 1539/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 September 2026AY 2016-1711 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act on July 13, 2022, was barred by the limitation period specified under Section 149 of the Act, as calculated based on the Supreme Court's decisions in Ashish Agarwal and Rajeev Bansal. The notice was found to be time-barred by 28 days. Consequently, the entire reassessment proceedings and the assessment order passed were quashed. The Tribunal also found merit in the assessee's argument regarding the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the AO for issuing the notice under Section 148. For Assessment Year 2016-17, where the notice was issued on July 13, 2022 (more than three years from the end of the assessment year), the AO was statutorily obligated to obtain approval from the authorities specified under Section 151(ii) of the amended Act. However, the AO obtained approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore - 3, an authority not vested with jurisdiction under the amended Section 151. Therefore, the assessment was devoid of valid assumption of jurisdiction on this count as well. The other grounds raised by the assessee were rendered academic.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Narayana Srinivasa, filed a return of income for Assessment Year 2016-17 on September 29, 2016, declaring a total income of Rs. 3,16,600/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issuing a notice under Section 148 on July 13, 2022. The AO determined income escaping assessment at Rs. 39,11,259/-. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], challenging the reopening and the merits. The CIT(A) set aside the appeal. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer are void-ab-initio due to being time-barred, considering the provisions of the Income Tax Act, the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 (TOLA), and the Supreme Court judgments in Ashish Agarwal and Rajeev Bansal. The assessee argued that the notice under Section 148 dated July 13, 2022, was issued beyond the 'surviving period' and was therefore time-barred by 28 days, rendering the reassessment void. The revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 2. Whether the jurisdiction assumed by the Assessing Officer for issuing the notice under Section 148 dated July 13, 2022, was valid, specifically concerning the approval obtained under Section 151 of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021. The assessee contended that the approval was obtained from an authority not specified under the amended Section 151(ii) for cases where more than three years had elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year. The revenue did not present specific arguments on this point.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 144B,Section 149,Section 149(1),Section 151,Section 151(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep S - Addl. CIT
Pronounced: 22.09.2026

PER SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1087087642(1) dated 09-Mar-2026 for the Assessment Year 2016-17, arising out of the Order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 17.05.2023. ITA 1539/BANG/2026 NARAYANA SRINIVASA

2.

Briefly stated, facts of the case are assessee file

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 →