ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. GOURAV BATRA, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITITA 7/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 February 2026AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the Revenue's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 27.07.2022, for Assessment Year 2013-14, is barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed. The reasoning is based on the binding judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024 SCC Online SC 2693). This judgment requires the 'surviving period' for reassessment proceedings to be computed on a case-to-case basis, accounting for exclusions. In this case, the period from 28.06.2021 (when the original notice was issued and treated as a Section 148A(b) notice) to 31.05.2022 (when the assessee was given time to reply) was excluded. Furthermore, the fourth proviso to Section 149(1) limits the Assessing Officer to a maximum of seven days to issue a notice under Section 148 after the assessee's reply. Applying these principles, the outer limit for issuing the notice expired on 24.06.2022. Since the impugned notice was issued on 27.07.2022, it falls outside the statutory limitation period. The Ld. DR could not controvert these facts. The operative direction is to quash the notice.

What were the facts?

The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 10.07.2025, which arose from the assessment order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the DCIT u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The core issue revolves around the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. The initial notice under Section 148 was issued on 28.06.2021. Following the Apex Court's decision in Ashish Aggarwal, this notice was treated as a notice under Section 148A. A subsequent notice under Section 148A(b) was issued on 31.05.2022. The assessee filed a reply on 17.06.2022. The impugned notice under Section 148 was issued on 27.07.2022.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued on 27.07.2022, for Assessment Year 2013-14, is barred by limitation, thereby liable to be quashed? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notice under Section 148 dated 27.07.2022 is barred by limitation. The assessee relied on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024 SCC Online SC 2693) which mandates a case-to-case computation of the 'surviving period' for reassessment proceedings. The assessee contended that after excluding the period from 28.06.2021 to 31.05.2022 (when the notice was treated as 148A(b) and the assessee was given time to reply), and considering the maximum seven days allowed for issuing a notice under Section 148 as per the fourth proviso to Section 149(1), the outer limit for issuing the notice expired on 24.06.2022. Therefore, the notice issued on 27.07.2022 is beyond the statutory period. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through the Ld. DR, was not able to controvert the factual aspect presented by the assessee regarding the limitation period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144C(3),Section 148A,Section 149(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : D : NEW DELHI

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Shivam Garg, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 10.02.2026Pronounced: 10.02.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A No.07/Del/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 ACIT, Vs. Gourav Batra, Delhi Flat No.1, Plot No.7&8, Community Centre, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase I, Delhi – 110 028. PAN: AFDPB3828H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shivam Garg, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 10.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY:

The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 10.07.2025 of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi-42 [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the assessment order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the DCIT, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’) u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C (3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2013-14.

IT(IT)A No.7/Del/2025

2.

The facts leading to the case is that the first notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.06.2021 and as per TOLA the extended limitation period was dated 30.06.2021. Therefore, the surviving period was three days from 28.06.2021 to 30.06.2021 and the minimum period available for the AO to issue order u/s 148A(d) was seven days.

3.

After the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ashish Aggarwal in Civil Appeal No.3005 of 2002 the said notice was treated as notice u/s 148A under the new regime. The notice u/s 148A(b) thereafter was issued on 31.05.2022 giving two weeks’ time to file the reply by the assessee, i.e., by 14.06.2022. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal 2024 SCC Online SC 2693 has thereafter conclusively settled the manner of computation of limitation in such cases. It has been held that the validity of reassessment proceedings has to be tested by computing the “surviving period” available to the Assessing Officer on a case-to-case basis after accounting for all the exclusions. In the present case, as on 28.06.2021, only two days of limitation remained available, i.e. from 28.06.2021 to 30.06.2021. In terms of the third proviso to section 149(1), the period commencing from the date of issuance of the original notice (which stood deemed as notice under section 148A(b) till the date of supply of material and the time allowed to file reply is required to be excluded. Accordingly, the period from 28.06.2021 to 31.05.2022 stands excluded. Further, the limitation recommenced only after the assessee filed its

IT(IT)A No.7/Del/2025

reply on 17.06.2022. By applying the fourth proviso to section 149(1), the Assessing Officer could at best be granted a maximum of seven days to issue a notice under section 148. On a combined reading of the above provisions and the binding judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal, the outer limit for issuance of notice under section 148 in the present case expired on 24.06.2022. However, the impugned notice under section 148 has been issued on 27.07.2022, i.e. after the expiry of the statutory limitation period. In view of the matter, the assessee has challenged the notice u/s 148 of the Act issued on 27.07.2022 as barred by limitation and, thus, liable to be quashed. Very many judgements were relied upon by the assessee in this regard.

4.

The Ld. DR has not been able to controvert such factual aspect. Thus, having regard to the facts involved in the matter and the judgements passed by different forums as relied by the assessee, the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 27.07.2022 is found to be barred by limitation and the same is, thus, liable to be quashed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/-

(SANJAY AWASTHI) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13th February, 2026.

IT(IT)A No.7/Del/2025

dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →