MANISH AGARWAL,MK POINT vs. ITO WARD 37(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2460/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 October 2026AY 2015-20165 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings initiated by issuing a notice under Section 148 on 30.06.2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16 are barred by the law of limitation. This decision followed the judgment of the Apex Court in Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes, which in turn relied on the concession made by the Revenue in Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal. The Apex Court in Rajeev Bansal had conceded that for Assessment Year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021, would have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. Since the notice in the present case was dated 25.06.2021 (as per the Apex Court judgment cited, though the present case states 30.06.2022, the principle applies), it was considered barred. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the notice and all consequential orders passed pursuant to it.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Manish Agarwal, filed an appeal against an order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning Assessment Year 2015-16. The appeal challenged reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The jurisdictional notice under Section 148 was issued on 30.06.2022. The assessee contended that these reassessment proceedings were barred by limitation. The revenue supported the impugned order. The Tribunal noted that the notice under Section 148 was issued on 30.06.2022 for AY 2015-16.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, by issuing a notice on 30.06.2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16 are barred by limitation, in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the reassessment proceedings were barred by limitation, relying on the Hon'ble Apex Court's judgment in Rajeev Bansal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC). Revenue's Contention: The Ld. DR supported the impugned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No 2460 /KOL/2025 Assessment Year- 2015-16 Manish Agarwal..............................................................................................Appellant C/O Vishal Agarwal, MK Point, Suite No.505,27, Bentinck Street, Kolkata- 700001, Kolkata [PAN No. AEGPA5504B]

Vs. ITO Ward 37(1).........................................................,..……………....……….Respondent 3, Govt. Place West, Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal- 700001 Appearances by: Prakash Shaw, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing: October 06, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: October 30 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.08.2025 of the Office of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under Section 147r.w.s144 of the Assessment Year 2015-16 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. At the very outset, the Ld. AR in course of argument has raised a legal issue thereby submitting that re-assessment proceeding initiated u/s 148 of the Act vide jurisdictional notice u/s 148 on 30.06.2022 as barred by limitation in

ITA No.2460/Kol/2026 view of the the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a case of Rajeev Bansal reported in (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC). The Ld. DR supports the impugned order.

3.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the record of the impugned order, it is an admitted fact that the present case relates to the A.Y- 2015-16 and notice issued u/s 148AB was on 30.06.2022. We have also come across with the judgment passed by Apex Court in Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes in Civil Appeal No- 5177 to 5179/2025 and held thus- 2. These appeals arise from the order passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition (C) Nos. 2446 of 2023, 2543 of 2023 dated 1.2.2023 and 2544 of 2023 dated 10.02.2023 respectively by which the High Court disposed of the original writ petitions in the following terms:“1. The memo of appearance filed by Mr. S. S. Mohapatra, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue Department on behalf of Opposite Parties is taken on record. 2. In view of the order passed by this Court on 1st December, 2022 in a batch of writ petitions of which W.P.(C) No.9191 of 2022 (Kailash Kedia v. Income Tax Officer) was a lead matter and the subsequent order dated 10th January, 2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.36314 of 2022 (Shiv MettalicksPvt. Ltd., Rourkela v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Sambalpur), the Court declines to entertain the present writ petition, but leaves it open to the Petitioner to raise all grounds available to the Petitioner in accordance with law 17:51:47 IST Reason: including the grounds urged in the present petition at the appropriate stage as explained by the Court in those orders. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.” 3. We heard Mr. Saswat Kumar Acharya, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants(assessee) and Mr. Chandrashekhar, the learned counsel appearing for the revenue. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with his usual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a three judge bench decision of this Court in Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus:“19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015- 2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.” 5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decision that is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is required to be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so far as the present litigation is concerned is dated 25.6.2021. 6. In view of the aforesaid, in such circumstances referred to above the original writ petition nos.2446 of 2023, 2543 of 2023 and 2544 of 2023 respectively filed before the 2

ITA No.2460/Kol/2026 High Court of Orissa at cuttack stands allowed. 7. The impugned notice therein stands quashed and set aside. 8. The relief in terms of prayer (a) is granted. 9. The appeals stand disposed of in the above terms. 10. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. 4. In view of the discussion made above and following the judgment of the Apex Court as discussed above notice issued u/s 148 on 30.06.2022 as barred by law of limitation. Consequent and thereto all order passed in pursuant to the notice are also hereby set aside. Kolkata, the 30th October, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

MANISH Digitally signed by MANISH KUMAR KUMAR BHOI DC Date: 2026.11.02 BHOI Dated: 30. 10.2026. 11:41:23 +05'30'

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 3

ITA No.2460/Kol/2026 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order

ITA No.2460/Kol/2026

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →