DRISTI TIE-UP PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2722/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 October 2026AY 2015-20167 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 notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on July 29, 2022, was indeed beyond the period of limitation. The Tribunal noted that the relaxation granted by TOLA from April 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021, is not applicable to the impugned assessment year (2015-16). This conclusion was based on the Supreme Court's decision in Rajeev Bansal (supra), which was subsequently followed by the Delhi High Court in Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the Rajasthan High Court in its order dated January 27, 2025. The Tribunal also referred to the ratio laid down in Deepak Steel & Power Ltd. vs. CBDT (supra). Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the reopening of the assessment and the assessment framed thereunder. The appeal of the assessee was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dristi Tie-Up Private Limited, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16 declaring a total income of Rs. 98,080/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging the assessee received accommodation entries amounting to Rs. 1,18,74,000/- from shell companies during the financial year 2014-15. A notice under Section 148 was issued on July 29, 2022. The assessee filed a return in response. The AO assessed the total income at Rs. 1,19,720.80/-. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2015-16 is barred by limitation, considering the provisions of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA)? Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred. They contended that the benefit of TOLA is not available for Assessment Year 2015-16, citing the Supreme Court decision in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal and the Delhi High Court's decision in Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, which held that reopening for AY 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA from April 1, 2021. They also relied on decisions from coordinate benches and the Rajasthan High Court, as well as the Supreme Court case of Deepak Steel & Power Ltd. vs. CBDT. Revenue's contention: The learned DR supported the impugned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

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

Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No 2722 /KOL/2026 Assessment Year- 2015-16 Dristi Tie-Up Private Limited..................................................................................Appellant 15C, Clive Row, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Kolkata West Bengal- 700001 [PAN No. AACCD8783A]

Vs. Income Tax Officer........................................................,..……………....……….Respondent Ward-6(1), Kolkata, West Bengal- 700069

Appearances by: Sunil Surana, FCA, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Haridas Rajkumar, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing: October 01, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: October 30 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.07.2026 of the Office of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under Section 147r.w.s143(3) of the Assessment Year 2025-16 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

The only issue raised by the AR is in respect to the Assessment Year 2015-16 being time barred by limitation in view of the Apex Court decision

ITA No.2722/Kol/2026 passed in the Union of India and others vs Rajeev Bansal Case (2024)469 ITR 46 Supreme Court.

3.

The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee files return of income declaring total income of Rs. 98,080/-.Assessment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act was initiated as the assessee was in receipt of accommodation entries amounting to Rs. 1,18,74,000/- from shell companies namely M/s Foreshore Distributors Pvt Ltd., M/s Sonu Vanijya Pvt Ltd. And M/s Avlokon Vintrade Pvt. Ltd during the financial year 2014-15. A notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.07.2022 and assessee was requested to furnish return in response to the notice and in response to the notices assessee files return of income. Further the Assessing Officers after going over the submission made by the assessee assessed the total income at Rs. 1,19,720.80/-.

Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) where in appeal has been dismissed.

4.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied assessee preferred appeal before us by taking the legal grounds i.e. notice issued u/s 148 as time barred. The Ld Counsel submitted that notice issued u/s 148 as barred by limitation and the tola is not available. The Ld. Counsel vehemently submitted before us that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by limitation as benefit of TOLA is not available to the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee relied on in defense of 2

ITA No.2722/Kol/2026 his arguments on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No.8629 of 2024, reported in 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) pronounced on 03.10.2024 which has been followed by Hon'ble Delhi Court in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in WP(C) No. 17639/2022 order dated 13.12.2024 wherein it has been held that reopening of assessment for 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA on and from 01.04.2021. The said decision has been followed by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Orbit Financial Capital, ITA No. 5812/M/2024. The Id. AR submitted that even the Coordinate Bench in the case of Coplama Products Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1806/Kol/2024 pronounced on 31.01.2025 has followed the said decision. Thereafter, the Rajasthan High Court in WP No. 3667 of 2023 vide its order dated 27.01.2025 has taken the similar view. The Ld. AR, also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Steel & Power Ltd Vs CBDT (2025) 174 taxmann.com 144(SC) and therefore, prayed that the assessment framed may kindly be quashed.

Contrary to that learned DR supports the impugned order.

5.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we find that undisputedly, the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 29.07.2022 which falls beyond the period of limitation as the relaxation granted by TOLA w.e.f. 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 is not available in the 3

ITA No.2722/Kol/2026 impugned assessment year as has been held in the case of Rajeev Bansal (supra) by the Hon'ble Apex Court and thereafter the said decision has been followed in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We note that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that thereopening of assessment for Ay 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA on and from 01.04.2021. We also note that Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in WP No. 3667 of 2023 dated 27.01.2025 has taken a similar view. The Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Deepak Steel & Power Ltd Vs CBDT (supra) has laid the same ratio.

Considering the facts of the assessee's case in the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are inclined to hold that the reopening of assessment is barred by limitation and is accordingly quashed. The assessment framed is also quashed.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Kolkata, the 30th October, 2026.

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

ITA No.2722/Kol/2026

DC Dated: 30. 10.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order

MANISH Digitally signed by MANISH KUMAR KUMAR BHOI Date: 2026.11.02 BHOI 11:50:15 +05'30'

ITA No.2722/Kol/2026

ITA No.2722/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 →