SEMA DAGA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 658/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 October 2026AY 2013-1412 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 25.07.2022, for the assessment year 2013-14, is barred by limitation. The reasoning followed the precedent set by the Tribunal's own bench in similar cases, specifically referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal. The Tribunal found that the notice was issued beyond the permissible time limit for reopening the assessment. Consequently, the reopening of the assessment was quashed. The Tribunal further held that once the reassessment itself is quashed, all subsequent proceedings become non-est (as if they never existed). The appeal of the assessee was allowed on this ground, rendering other grounds academic. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Smt. Seema Daga, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Raipur Bench, challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2013-14. The core of the appeal concerns the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the notice, dated 25.07.2022, was issued beyond the permissible period of limitation, rendering the reopening of assessment illegal and liable to be quashed. The ITAT noted that a similar issue had been decided in favour of the assessee by its own bench in a prior case. The revenue, represented by the Sr. DR, could not provide any evidence to counter the assessee's submissions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 25.07.2022, for the assessment year 2013-14, is barred by limitation, making the reopening of assessment bad in law? Assessee's contentions: - The notice under Section 148, dated 25.07.2022, was issued after the expiry of the surviving period for the assessment year 2013-14. - Relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal, which clarified the application of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) and the time limits for issuing reassessment notices. - Cited decisions of the ITAT, Raipur Bench in Shri Inder Jaggi and M/s Kachrulal Jitendra Kumar, the Delhi High Court in Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd., and the Delhi ITAT in KLM Steel Pipe Pvt. Ltd., all of which held that notices issued beyond the limitation period are invalid. - Argued that once the reassessment notice is quashed, subsequent proceedings become non-est. Revenue's contentions: - The judgment records that the Ld. Sr. DR could not furnish any evidence to refute the assessee's facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148A,Section 149,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pandse, CA
For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.10.2026Pronounced: 06.10.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 15.06.2026 for the assessment year 2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

The contention in law raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee is that notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), dated 25.07.2022 for A.Y.2013-14 is barred by limitation and accordingly, reopenin

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 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →