PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. PANKAJ ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/817/2026HC DelhiDLHC01049560202613 October 2026Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, without going into the merits of the case, decided not to entertain the appeal. The Court referenced the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, which clarified that the amendment to Section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, under the new regime is not prospective and applies to past assessment years. The Court noted that the time limit for issuing notices under Section 148 under the new regime is reduced to three years, and for past assessment years, the proviso to Section 149(1)(b) requires the time limit to survive under the old regime (six years). Consequently, the Court concluded that all such notices would have to be dropped. Based on this reasoning, the Court was not inclined to entertain the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 (Appellant/Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated 05.12.2025 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.4188/DE/2024. The respondent is Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. The tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit of Rs.2 crores, but the Revenue contended it was an exception due to an alleged accommodation entry. The High Court noted a Supreme Court judgment regarding the retrospective application of amendments to Section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its impact on reassessment notices.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal, having a tax effect below Rs.2 crores, is maintainable despite the Revenue's contention of it being an exception due to an accommodation entry, as per Circular No.09/2024 and Circular No.05/2024? Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The case falls into an exception as stipulated under Circular No. 05/2024 due to it being a case of an accommodation entry, thus permitting the appeal despite the tax effect being below the monetary limit. 2. Whether the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, under the new regime, are valid considering the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, particularly concerning the reduced time limit and the proviso to Section 149(1)(b)? Assessee's Contention: Not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The judgment in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, mandates that reassessment notices under the new regime can only be issued if three years have lapsed from the relevant assessment year, and for past assessment years, the time limit must survive under the old regime (six years). This implies that all such notices will have to be dropped.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 149(1),Section 148,Section 149(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~142 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010495602026 + ITA 817/2026 & CM APPL. 71399/2026 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 .....Appellant Through: versus PANKAJ ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR

O R D E R %

13.10.

2026

1.

The present Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been filed by the Appellant challenging the Order dated 05.12.2025, passed by the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in ITA No.4188/DE/2024. 2. The tax effect in the present Appeal is below the monetary limit of Rs.2 crores in view of the Circular No.09/2024. It is stated by the Ld. Counsel for the Revenue that it is a case of an accommodation entry, therefore, the present case falls into an exception as stipulated under Circular no. 05/2024. 3. In any event, in view of the Judgment passed by the Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693 which states that amendment to Section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/10/2026 at 12:30:35

new regime is not prospective and applies to past Assessment Years also, and the time limit of four years is now reduced to three years for all situations, and the Department can issue notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under new regime only if three years have lapsed from the date of the relevant Assessment year, and that the proviso to Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the new regime stipulates that the Department can issue reassessment notices for past Assessment years only if the time limit survives according to Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the old regime i.e., six years from the date of relevant Assessment Year, all the notices will have to be dropped.

4.

In view of the above, without going into the merit of the case, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Appeal.

5.

Accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of, along with pending application(s), if any.

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

RENU BHATNAGAR, J OCTOBER 13, 2026 S. Zakir/KG

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/10/2026 at 12:30:35

More judgments on Section 149(1)

All 128 judgments and leading authorities on Section 149(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →