VINODKUMAR UGAMRAJ SALECHA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1), GUNTUR

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2013-14, declaring total income of Rs.1,73,620/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) reopened the case of the assessee under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and issued a notice under section 148 of the Act bearing the date 31.03.2021. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed his return of income on 31.05.2021, declaring total income of Rs.1,73,620/-. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the AO completed the assessment under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act, vide order dated 14.03.2022, making an addition of Rs.53,28,320/- under section 69 of the Act and thereby assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.55,01,940/-. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (“ Ld. AR”) submitted that, under Ground No. 2, the assessee has raised a legal ground challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act on the basis of a notice issued under section 148 of the Act after 31.03.2021, without following the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the Act. He submitted that, although the notice bears the date 31.03.2021, it was actually issued on 01.04.2021. In support of this contention, the Ld. AR invited our attention to the email communication placed at page no. 3 of the paper book and pointed out that the notice was sent by the Revenue on 01.04.2021 at 6:42 AM. He also invited our attention to the screenshot of the income-tax portal placed at page no. 2 of the paper book, wherein the date of issue of the notice under section 148 of the Act is reflected as 01.04.2021. Accordingly, he submitted that the contemporaneous records establish that the notice was issued only on 01.04.2021. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Suman Jeet Agarwal Vs. ITO [2022] 143 taxmann.com 11 (Delhi). 6. The Ld. AR further submitted that, with effect from 01.04.2021, a notice under section 148 of the Act was required to be issued after following the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the Act, including passing an order under section 148A(d) of the Act. However, the AO did not follow the said procedure in the present case. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned notice is invalid and that the assessment order passed pursuant thereto is liable to be quashed. 7. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) invited our attention to the notice under section 148 of the Act placed at page no. 1 of the paper book and submitted that it was digitally signed by the AO on 31.03.2021. He submitted that, after signing, the notice was uploaded on the income-tax portal for onward transmission to the assessee. According to the Ld. DR, owing to the electronic processing involved in its transmission, the email was generated and delivered to the assessee on 01.04.2021. He contended that the notice had, in fact, been issued on 31.03.2021 itself and that its subsequent electronic delivery on 01.04.2021 would not render it time-barred. In support of their contention the Revenue relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Malavika Enterprises Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, 445 ITR 651 (Madras). Accordingly, he submitted that there was no infirmity in the notice and prayed for rejection of Ground No. 2 of the assessee.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record including the case laws relied upon. The first question requiring consideration is whether the notice under section 148 of the Act, bearing the date 31.03.2021, was actually issued on that date or on 01.04.2021. In this regard, we have gone through the copy of the email communication received by the assessee from the Revenue regarding the notice under section 148 of the Act, placed at page no. 3 of the paper book, which is to the following effect:

On perusal of the above, we find that the email was sent by the Revenue on 01.04.2021 at 6:42 AM. We have also examined the screenshot of the income-tax portal placed at page no. 2 of the paper book which is to the following effect:

On perusal of the above, we find that the date of issue of the notice under section 148 of the Act is reflected therein as 01.04.2021. Thus, both the email communication and the particulars appearing on the income-tax portal establish that the notice was issued on 01.04.2021. The contention of the Ld. DR that the notice was signed on 31.03.2021 does not alter the date of its actual issuance. Signing a notice and issuing it are distinct acts, and the date appearing on the notice cannot, by itself, establish that it was issued on that date. In the present case, the material on record shows that the email was sent on 01.04.2021; it is not merely a case of a notice transmitted on 31.03.2021 and received by the assessee on the following day. Further, the income-tax portal itself records the date of issue as 01.04.2021. The explanation offered by the Ld. DR regarding the electronic processing involved in transmission does not displace these contemporaneous records. In this regard, we have also gone through para nos. 25 to 25.23 of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Suman Jeet Agarwal Vs. ITO (supra), which is to the following effect:

On perusal of the above, we find that while considering notices bearing the date 31.03.2021 but electronically issued thereafter, the Hon’ble High Court distinguished the signing of a notice from its issuance and held that the actual date of electronic issuance would govern. Respectfully following the ratio laid down therein and having regard to the documentary evidence available in the present case, we hold that the notice under section 148 of the Act, though bearing the date 31.03.2021, was actually issued on 01.04.2021. We have also gone through para no. 8 of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Malavika Enterprises Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes (supra), which is to the following effect:

Having determined the date of issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, the next question is whether the notice issued on 01.04.2021, without following the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the Act, can sustain the reassessment. In this regard, we find that an identical issue have been considered by this Tribunal in para no. 11 to 18 of the order in the case of Srinivas Jakkam Vs. ITO in ITA No. 2028/Hyd/2025, for A.Y. 2016-17, dated 14.10.2026, which is to the following effect: “11. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from record that the AO had issued notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 31/03/2021, on 16/04/2021, Page 1 and 5 of APB. At this stage, we may observe that neither is anything discernible from the record nor anything brought to our notice that would dislodge the aforesaid factual position regarding the date of issuance of the notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 16/04/2021. 12. We shall, in the backdrop of the aforesaid fact that the AO had issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 31/03/201 on 16/04/2021, deal with the Ld. AR’s contention that the AO, having failed to conduct an inquiry and provide an opportunity before issuing the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act as contemplated under section 148A(a) to (d) of the Act, as had been made available in the statute vide the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01/04/2021, wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed the impugned assessment, which is thus liable to be quashed for want of valid assumption of jurisdiction. 13. Before proceeding further, we deem it apposite to cull out the substituted sections 147 to 149 and 151 of the Act, applicable w.e.f. 01/04/2021, as under: “Income escaping assessment- 147. If any income chargeable to tax, in the case of an assessee, has escaped assessment for any assessment year, the Assessing Officer may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Explanation.—For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A have not been complied with.”. Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment 148. Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, and subject to the provisions of section 148A, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice, along with a copy of the order passed, if required, under clause (d) of section 148A, requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in such notice, a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant assessment year, in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section 139: Provided that no notice under this section shall be issued unless there is information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year and the Assessing Officer has obtained prior approval of the specified authority to issue such notice. Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section and section 148A, the information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment means,— (i) any information flagged in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year in accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time; (ii) any final objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India to the effect that the assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year has not been made in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Explanation 2.—For the purposes of this section, where,— (i) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A, on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, in the case of the assessee; or (ii) a survey is conducted under section 133A, other than under subsection (2A) or subsection (5) of that section, on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, in the case of the assessee; or (iii) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned under section 132 or under section 132A in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, belongs to the assessee; or (iv) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, that any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned under section 132 or section 132A in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relate to, the assessee, the Assessing Officer shall be deemed to have information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the three assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search is initiated or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned or survey is conducted in the case of the assessee or money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents are seized or requisitioned in case of any other person. Explanation 3.—For the purposes of this section, specified authority means the specified authority referred to in section 151.” Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice under section 148- “148A. The Assessing Officer shall, before issuing any notice under section 148,— (a) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (b) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time, as may be specified in the notice, being not less than seven days and but not exceeding thirty days from the date on which such notice is issued, or such time, as may be extended by him on the basis of an application in this behalf, as to why a notice under section 148 should not be issued on the basis of information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in his case for the relevant assessment year and results of enquiry conducted, if any, as per clause (a); (c) consider the reply of assessee furnished, if any, in response to the showcause notice referred to in clause (b); (d) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148, by passing an order, with the prior approval of specified authority, within one month from the end of the month in which the reply referred to in clause (c) is received by him, or where no such reply is furnished, within one month from the end of the month in which time or extended time allowed to furnish a reply as per clause (b) expires: Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply in a case where,— (a) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A in the case of the assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2021; or (b) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in the case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, belongs to the assessee; or (c) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any books of account or documents, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relate to, the assessee. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, specified authority means the specified authority referred to in section 151.” Time limit for notice- “149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,— (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b); (b) if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax, represented in the form of asset, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year: Provided that no notice under section 148 shall be issued at any time in a case for the relevant assessment year beginning on or before 1st day of April, 2021, if such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of clause (b) of subsection (1) of this section, as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021: Provided further that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply in a case, where a notice under section 153A, or section 153C read with section 153A, is required to be issued in relation to a search initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets requisitioned under section 132A, on or before the 31st day of March, 2021: Provided also that for the purposes of computing the period of limitation as per this section, the time or extended time allowed to the assessee, as per show cause notice issued under clause (b) of section 148A or the period during which the proceeding under section 148A is stayed by an order or injunction of any court, shall be excluded: Provided also that where immediately after the exclusion of the period referred to in the immediately preceding proviso, the period of limitation available to the Assessing Officer for passing an order under clause (d) of section 148A is less than seven days, such remaining period shall be extended to seven days and the period of limitation under this subsection shall be deemed to be extended accordingly. Explanation.—For the purposes of clause (b) of this subsection, “asset” shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account. (2) The provisions of subsection (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.’ Sanction for issue of notice- “151. Specified authority for the purposes of section 148 and section 148A shall be— (i) Principal Commissioner or Principal Director or Commissioner or Director, if three years or less than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year; (ii) Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or where there is no Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General, Chief Commissioner or Director General, if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year.”

Also, we find that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agrawal, Civil Appeal No.3005/2022, dated 04.05.2022, after deliberating at length on the aforesaid amended provisions has, inter alia, observed as under: “5. We have heard Shri N. Venkataraman, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the Revenue and Shri C.A. Sundaram and Shri S. Ganesh, learned Senior Advocates and other learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective assessee. 6. It cannot be disputed that by substitution of sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act (IT Act) by the Finance Act, 2021, radical and reformative changes are made governing the procedure for reassessment proceedings. Amended sections 147 to 149 and section 151 of the IT Act prescribe the procedure governing initiation of reassessment proceedings. However, for several reasons, the same gave rise to numerous litigations and the reopening were challenged inter alia, on the grounds such as (1) no valid “reason to believe” (2) no tangible/reliable material /information in possession of the assessing officer leading to formation of belief that income has escaped assessment, (3) no enquiry being conducted by the assessing officer prior to the issuance of notice; and reopening is based on change of opinion of the assessing officer and (4) lastly the mandatory procedure laid down by this Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors; (2003) 1 SCC 72, has not been followed. 6.1 Further pre Finance Act, 2021, the reopening was permissible for a maximum period up to six years and in some cases beyond even six years leading to uncertainty for a considerable time. Therefore, Parliament thought it fit to amend the Income Tax Act to simplify the tax administration, ease compliances and reduce litigation. Therefore, with a view to achieve the said object, by the Finance Act, 2021, sections 147 to 149 and section 151 have been substituted. 6.2 Under the substituted provisions of the IT Act vide Finance Act, 2021, no notice under section 148 of the IT Act can be issued without following the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the IT Act. Along with the notice under section 148 of the IT Act, the assessing officer (AO) is required to serve the order passed under section 148A of the IT Act. section 148A of the IT Act is a new provision which is in the nature of a condition precedent. Introduction of section 148A of the IT Act can thus be said to be a game changer with an aim to achieve the ultimate object of simplifying the tax administration, ease compliance and reduce litigation. 6.3 But prior to pre-Finance Act, 2021, while reopening an assessment, the procedure of giving the reasons for reopening and an opportunity to the assessee and the decision of the objectives were required to be followed as per the judgment of this Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). 6.4 However, by way of section 148A, the procedure has now been streamlined and simplified. It provides that before issuing any notice under section 148, the assessing officer shall (i) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority; (iii) consider the reply of the assessee furnished, if any, in response to the showcause notice referred to in clause (b); and (iv) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, as to whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the IT Act and (v) the AO is required to pass a specific order within the time stipulated. 6.5 Therefore, all safeguards are provided before notice under section 148 of the IT Act is issued. At every stage, the prior approval of the specified authority is required, even for conducting the enquiry as per section 148A(a). Only in a case where, the assessing officer is of the opinion that before any notice is issued under section 148A(b) and an opportunity is to be given to the assessee, there is a requirement of conducting any enquiry, the assessing officer may do so and conduct any enquiry. Thus if the assessing officer is of the opinion that any enquiry is required, the assessing officer can do so, however, with the  prior approval of the specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 6.6 Substituted section 149 is the provision governing the time limit for issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act. The substituted section 149 of the IT Act has reduced the permissible time limit for issuance of such a notice to three years and only in exceptional cases ten years. It also provides further additional safeguards which were absent under the earlier regime preFinance Act, 2021. 7. Thus, the new provisions substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 being remedial and benevolent in nature and substituted with a specific aim and object to protect the rights and interest of the assessee as well as and the same being in public interest, the respective High Courts have rightly held that the benefit of new provisions shall be made available even in respect of the proceedings relating to past assessment years, provided section 148 notice has been issued on or after 1st April, 2021. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the various High Courts in holding so. 8. However, at the same time, the judgments of the several High Courts would result in no reassessment proceedings at all, even if the same are permissible under the Finance Act, 2021 and as per substituted sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act. The Revenue cannot be made remediless and the object and purpose of reassessment proceedings cannot be frustrated. It is true that due to a bonafide mistake and in view of subsequent extension of time vide various notifications, the Revenue issued the impugned notices under section 148 after the amendment was enforced w.e.f. 01.04.2021, under the unamended section 148. In our view the same ought not to have been issued under the unamended Act and ought to have been issued under the substituted provisions of sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act as per the Finance Act, 2021. There appears to be genuine nonapplication of the amendments as the officers of the Revenue may have been under a bonafide belief that the amendments may not yet have been enforced. Therefore, we are of the opinion that some leeway must be shown in that regard which the High Courts could have done so. Therefore, instead of quashing and setting aside the reassessment notices issued under the unamended provision of IT Act, the High Courts ought to have passed an order construing the notices issued under unamended Act/unamended provision of the IT Act as those deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as per the new provision section 148A and the Revenue ought to have been permitted to proceed further with the reassessment proceedings as per the substituted provisions of sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act as per the Finance Act, 2021, subject to compliance of all the procedural requirements and the defences, which may be available to the assessee under the substituted provisions of sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act and which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law. Therefore, we propose to modify the judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts as under: (i) The respective impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and treated to be show cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The respective assessing officers shall within thirty days from today provide to the assessees the information and material relied upon by the Revenue so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry with the prior approval of the specified authority under section 148A(a) be dispensed with as a onetime measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under Section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass an order in terms of section 148A(d) after following the due  procedure as required under section 148A(b) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; (iv) All the defenses which may be available to the assessee under section 149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open and/or shall continue to be available and; (v) The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts quashing the similar notices issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act irrespective of whether they have been assailed before this Court or not. 9. There is a broad consensus on the aforesaid aspects amongst the learned ASG appearing on behalf of the Revenue and the learned Senior Advocates/learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective assessees. We are also of the opinion that if the aforesaid order is passed, it will strike a balance between the rights of the Revenue as well as the respective assesses as because of a bonafide belief of the officers of the Revenue in issuing approximately 90000 such notices, the Revenue may not suffer as ultimately it is the public exchequer which would suffer. Therefore, we have proposed to pass the present order with a view avoiding filing of further appeals before this Court and burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals against the similar judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts, the particulars of some of which are referred to hereinabove. We have also proposed to pass the aforesaid order in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India by holding that the present order shall govern, not only the impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, but shall also be made applicable in respect of the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts across the country and therefore the present order shall be applicable to PAN INDIA.

In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under: (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assesees can reply to the show cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a onetime measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defenses which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 11. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 12. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only. All these appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” (emphasis supplied by us)

We find that as per the amended provisions of section 147 of the Act as had been made available in the statute vide Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f 01/04/2021 read along with the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. In Ashish Agrawal (supra), no notice under section 148 of the Act can be issued without following the procedure prescribed under section 148 of the Act. Also, before issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act, the AO must serve the assessee with the order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act, which is a condition precedent for valid assumption of jurisdiction. 16. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agrawal (supra) at Para 6.4 observed that the introduction of section 148A of the Act has streamlined and simplified the procedure. It provides that before issuing any notice under section 148, the assessing officer shall (i) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority; (iii) consider the reply of the assessee furnished, if any, in response to the show cause notice referred to in clause (b); and (iv) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, as to whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the IT Act; and (v) the AO is required to pass a specific order within the time stipulated. The Hon’ble Apex Court had further observed that all the safeguards are provided before a notice under section 148 of the Act is issued. 17. We are of the firm conviction that as the AO in the present case had issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 31/03/2021, on 16/04/2021 without complying with and following the statutory procedure contemplated under section 148 of the Act for conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issuing the notice, therefore, as stated by the Ld. AR and rightly so, he had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed the impugned assessment vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 25/03/2022. 18. We thus, based on our aforesaid observations, quash the assessment framed by the AO based on an invalid assumption of jurisdiction.” 14. On perusal of the above, we find that this Tribunal after considering the substituted provisions of sections 147 to 149 and 151 of the Act applicable w.e.f. 1.04.2021 and the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal (Supra) has categorically held that the notice issued by the AO under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 on or after 01.04.2021 without complying with and following the statutory procedure contemplated under section 148A of the Act for conducting enquiry, providing opportunity before issuing the notice is the assumption of wrong jurisdiction by the AO and finally quash the assessment framed by the AO. In the present case, we have already held that the notice under section 148 of the Act bearing the date 31.03.2021 was actually issued on 01.04.2021. It is also undisputed that the AO did not follow the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the Act. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of in the case of Srinivas Jakkam Vs. ITO (supra), we hold that the notice under section 148 of the Act, actually issued on 01.04.2021 without compliance with the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the Act is invalid. Consequently, the assessment order dated 14.03.2022, passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act on the basis of the invalid notice, is quashed. 15. Since the assessment itself has been quashed on the basis of above legal ground, the remaining grounds do not require adjudication and are left open. 16. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 791/Viz/2025 is allowed. ITA Nos. 792 and 793/Viz/2025 (A.Ys 2014-15 & 2015-16) 17. The issues involved in these two appeals are identical to the issues involved in ITA No.791/Viz/2025 for the A.Y 2013-14. Accordingly, our observations and findings in ITA No.791/Viz/2025 shall mutatis mutandis apply to these two appeals also. Accordingly, these two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. 18. To sum up all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16th October, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 16th October, 2026. Vinodan/sps Copy to: