AJAY MULTI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, AAYKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL () Assessment Year: 2016-17
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated
06.01.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals) [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2016-17, raising following grounds:
1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the validity of notice issued u/s. 148 the Act for reopening of the assessment by the Assessing Officer.
The notice as the juri i not been fulfil 3. The reopen of mind and t 4. The provisi as a result, th The sanction reassessment 6. The Ld. C proceedings a 143(3) r.w.s. same was ag in law. 7. The Ld. CI by the Assess by adding the (i) Syncom Fo (i) Stampede C Virtual Global (iv) Nyssa Cor totaling to of the assess 8. The Ld. CI entire sale pr u/s. 69A r.w fact that the said four scri business inco 9. The Ld. C penalty proce 10. The Ld. C u/s. 234A, 23 Ajay IT u/s148 is bad in law and without juris ictional requirements of section 147 to 15 lled. ning of assessment is without proper app therefore, bad in law. ions of section 148A have not been follow he reassessment proceedings are bad in l u/s 151 is bad in law and as a res t proceeding is bad in law. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the reo and upholding he order passed u/s. 147 144B of the Act without appreciating t gainst the principle of Natural Justice and IT(A) has erred in upholding the addition sing Officer u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of t e entire sale proceeds of the four scrips, rmulation (India) Ltd. - Rs. 3,93,91,482/- Capital Ltd. - Rs. 3,16,83,459/-, (iii) l Education Ltd. - Rs. 1,17,87,390/-, rporation Ltd. - Rs. 60,26,810/-, Rs. 8,88,89,141/- as unexplained ses. IT(A) has erred in upholding the adding roceeds of the four scrips of Rs. 8,88,89 w.s. 11SBBE of the Act without appreciat net profit earned of Rs. 63,35,453/- fr ips was already offered for tax by asse ome. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the initia eedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of 34B, 234C and 234D of the Act. y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd 2 TA No. 587/MUM/2025 iction 51 have plication wed and law. ult, the opening 7 r.w.s. that the d is bad n made the Act, , money back of 9,141/- ting the rom the esse as ation of interest
Briefly stated, engaged in the bus advances, investmen The assessee filed re income at Rs.1,75,1 assessee was selected under the Income-tax served upon the ass u/s 143(3) of the Ac the assessee was acc Act was issued on 3 un-amended old prov that limitation which to 30.06.2021 by way and Amendments of TOLA). The Depart provisions with exten subjected to writ pet Hon’ble Supreme Cou taxmann.com 64(SC) section 148 of the Ac process before actual the Hon’ble Supreme been made effective provisions u/s 148 Ajay IT facts of the case are that t siness of inter corporate depo nt in shares & securities and sh eturn of income on 01.09.2016 13,680/-. The return of incom d for scrutiny assessment and s x Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) w sessee. In the scrutiny assessm ct on 30.11.2018, the returned cepted. Subsequently, the notice 30.06.2021. This notice was is visions of 148 under the Act , h was expiring on 31.03.2020, w ay of The Taxation and Other La f certain Provisions ) Act , 2020 tment had issued such noti nded period of TOLA in many ca titions before various Hon’ble H urt in the case of Ashish Agarw ) held that w.e.f. 01.04.2021, t ct are amended with introductio lly issue of notice u/s 148 of the e Court held that once the new from 01.04.2021 the old or th are not operation as on 0 y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd 3 TA No. 587/MUM/2025 the assessee is osits/loans and hare trading etc. 6 declaring total me filed by the statutory notices were issued and ment completed income filed by e u/s 148 of the sued under the on the premise was extended up aws ( Relaxation 0 ( in short the ices under old ases which were High Courts. The al in (2022) 138 he provisions of on of three stage e Act. Therefore, provisions have he un-amended 01.04.2021 and therefore, same cann Supreme Court held new provisions durin But as a onetime me Article 142(1) of the notices u/s 148 of 148A(b) of the Act am Accordingly, the not assessee on 30.06.20 Act. Further, in the assessees challenged reassessment under 148 of the Act as wel the Act under the am in the case of Rajeev that the period from under old provision assessee before the A the Hon’ble Supreme will be deemed to b survival period for process of reassessm under the amended p Ajay IT not be extended by way of TO d that however TOLA will be ap ng the period from 01.04.2021 asure, the Hon’ble Supreme Cou e Constitution of India directe the Act old provisions as not mended reassessment provisions tice u/s 148 of the Act issued 021 was held to be issued u/s e case of Rajiv Agrawal (supr d the limitation in completing th amended provisions and issu ll as sanction/approval of the n mended provisions. The Hon’ble v Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.co m the issue of the notice u/s s up to the period of filing o Assessing officer, consequent to e Court in the case of Ashish A be stayed and the Assessing issue of completion of the en ment and issue of the notice u/s provisions. y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd 4 TA No. 587/MUM/2025 LA, the Hon’ble pplicable on the to 30.06.2021. urt invoking the ed to treat the tice issued u/s s. d in the case of s 148A(b) of the ra), the various he process of the ue of notice u/s otice u/s 151 of Supreme Court om 70 (SC) held 148 of the Act of reply by the o the decision of Agarwal (supra), Officer will get ntire three step s 148 of the Act
In the case of the as provisions was issu available to the AO an the day of filing of rep of Ashish Agarwal (su
3. Before us, the challenged the validit the Act. The assessee the notice u/s 148 of 4. We have heard the relevant material the assessee specific the Act. Under the ol upto four years witho from the end of the evaded income excee now w.e.f. 01.04.202
notice within three y year, but notice beyo if the tax evaded inc proviso to section restriction has been for evasion exceedin the new provisions a Ajay
IT sessee notice u/s 148 of the Ac ed on 30.06.2021, So no sur nd entire procedure was to be c ply by the assessee subsequent upra).
Ld. counsel for the assessee h ty of the limitation in issuing no e has only challenged the appro f the Act from the appropriate au rival submissions of the parti ls on record. The ground No. 5
cally relate to the issue of sanc ld provisions notice u/s 148 cou out any income limit but from f relevant assessment year wher eds Rs.1,00,000/-. But in ame
21 no limit of income escaped years from the end of the relev ond 3 years up to 10 years could come exceeded Rs.50,00,000/-.
147 under the amended pro imposed not to apply the period ng Rs.50,00,000/- retrospective along with TOLA, the notices u/
y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
5
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
ct under the old rvival period is ompleted within to the decisions has however not otice u/s 148 of oval for issue of uthority.
ies and perused of the appeal of ction u/s 151 of uld be issued up four to six years re minimum tax ended provision d is for issue of vant assessment d be issued only
. But by way of ovisions further d upto 10 years ely. Thus under /s 148 could be issued up to 30.06
assessment year 201
lakhs and in case of the notices under 14
2013-14. In the inst
50,00,000/- and ass
148 of the Act co provisions beyond th notice u/s 148 of the it is within the limit
The assessee challen during submission
Assessing Officer in 29.07.2022 has rejec the said order is ava
Paper Book. Theref
29.07.2022 , a copy o
4.1 Before us, the L the limitation in is challenged the appro of notice u/s 148 s referred to the secti period within three y of notice approval of Ajay
IT 6.2021 in respect of assessme
16-17 in case of tax evaded inco f tax evaded income exceeding
48 could be issued only up to a ant case, the income evaded is sessment year being 2016-17, t uld have been issued under he period of three years up to 31
e Act has been issued on 29.07. tation even without invoking TO nged limitation of issuing u/s before the Assessing Officer his order passed u/s 148A(d) o cted the contention of the asse ailable on Paper Book page 21
fater notice u/s 148 has b of which is available on Paper B
Ld. counsel for the assessee has ssuing notice u/s 148 of the opriate authority from whom sa should have been obtained. T ion 151 of the Act and subm years of the relevant assessmen the Ld. Principal Commissione y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
6
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
ent year up to ome up to Rs.50
Rs.50,00,000/-, assessment year s more than Rs.
then notice u/s r the amended
1.03.2023. Since
2022, therefore,
OLA provisions.
148 of the Act r however, the of the Act dated essee. A copy of 4 to 227 of the een issued on ook page 213. s not challenged e Act but only anction for issue
The Ld. counsel itted that for a nt year, for issue r of Income-tax(
PCIT) was required w from the end of the Principal Chief Com
Commissioner of Inco notice u/s 148 of th three years from th therefore, in our opin
For ready relevant pr
“Sanction fo
151. Specifie section 148A
(i) Principal C or Director, if from the end o
(ii) Principal C where here
Director Gen- more than thr assessment y
4.2 Before us, the L
3 of the notice u/s 1
mentioned that prior vide his letter dated has been issued bey should have been ob has been obtained fr from the appropriate
Ajay
IT whereas for issue of notice bey relevant assessment year appr mmissioner of Income-tax (PC ome-tax(CCIT) was required. Un he Act had been issued beyon he end of the relevant assessm nion, the approval of Ld. PCCIT rovision of section 151 is reprodu or issue of notice.
d authority for the purposes of section shall be,—
Commissioner or Principal Director or Com f three years or less than three years hav of the relevant assessment year;
Chief Commissioner or Principal Director G is no Principal Chief Commissioner or -eral, Chief Commissioner or Director G ree years have elapsed from the end of th year.]”
Ld. counsel for the assessee has 48 of the Act issued on 29.07.2
r approval of the PCIT-4, Mumb
26.07.2022. Since notice u/s yond the period of three year btained from the PCCIT/CCIT w rom the PCIT and therefore, app authority under the law notice y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
7
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
ond three years roval of the Ld.
CCIT) or Chief ndisputedly, the nd the period of ment years and T was required.
uced as under:
n 148 and mmissioner ve elapsed
General or r Principal
General, it he relevant referred to para
2022 where it is bai was obtained
148 of the Act rs, the approval hereas approval proval not being u/s 148 issued in the case of the as came up before t
3551/Mum/2024 fo
Tribunal held simila reproduced as under “7. On bare
Hon'ble Supre find that the H
(a) Under ne
Assessing Of sanction of th at first stage
Section 148A fourth stage u
(supra) the Ho obtaining pri
148A(b) of th required to o according to order under S
148. (b) Under new than Rupees after expiry of year only af
Chief Commi
Commissione
(c) The test to of the new reg end of an ass
31st March 2
151(i) has a approval.
(d) Section 15
authority if m
Year 2017-18
Thus, non-com
Ajay
IT ssessee is liable to be quashed.
the Tribunal in the case o or assessment year 2017-18
ar finding. The relevant part of :
reading of the above extract of the jud eme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (s
Hon'ble Supreme Court had clarified as u ew regime introduced by the Finance A fficer was required to obtain prior ap he 'Specified Authority' at four stages - e under Section 148A(a), at second sta
A(b), at third stage under Section 148A(d under Section 148. In the case of Ashish on'ble Supreme Court waived off the requ ior approval under section 148A(a) an he Act only. Therefore, the Assessing Of obtain prior approval of the 'Specified
Section 151 of the new regime before p
Section 148A(d) or issuing a notice und w regime if income escaping assessmen
50 lakhs a reassessment notice could f three years from the end of the relevan fter obtaining the prior approval of the issioner or Principal Director General r or Director General.
determine whether TOLA will apply to Se gime is this: if the time limit of three year sessment year falls between 20th March
2021, then the 'Specified Authority' und an extended time till 30th June 2021
51(ii) of the new regime prescribes a high more than three years have elapsed As 8 from the end of the relevant assessm mpliance by the assessing officer with y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
8
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
. Identical issue of in ITA No.
8 wherein the f the decision is dgment of supra), we nder:
Act, 2021
pproval or age under d), and at h Agarwal uirement of nd Section fficer was Authority'
assing an er Section nt is more be issued nt previous e Principal or Chief ection 151
rs from the 2020 and er Section to grant her level of ssessment ment year.
the strict time limits pre to issue a not (e) Grant of precondition f under section 8. In the pres
Assessment Y
2021. The exp
2020 and 31s
TOLA. Result of the new re
2021. On pe under Section order was Commissione passed after
Assessment authority spe
Chief Commis grant appro
30/07/2022, regime) after
Commissione the present c specified und authority spec
9. The non- provisions A 148A(d) read juri iction of Section 148
30/07/2022
consequential
25/05/2023, of the Act ar provisions co
Section 151(ii
Assessee is a the Revenue granted by th rendered infru
Ajay
IT escribed under section 151 affects their ju tice under section 148
f sanction by the appropriate autho for the assessing officer to assume ju n 148 to issue a reassessment notice.
sent case the period of 3 years from the e
Year 2017-2018 fell for completion on 3
piry date fell during the time period of 20
st March 2021, contemplated under Sect tantly, the authority specified under Sect egime could have granted sanction till 3
erusal of the order, dated 30/07/2022
n 148A(d) of the Act we find that the passed after taking approval from r of Income Tax. Since the aforesaid o r the expiry of 3 years from the en
Year 2017- 2018, as per the new re cified under Section 151(ii) of the Act (i.e ssioner or Chief Commissioner) was re val. We note that even the notic was issued under Section 148 of the r obtaining the prior approval of the r of Income Tax. Accordingly, we conclu case the approval has been obtained by der Section 151(i) of the new regime inste cified under Section 151(ii) of the new reg compliance by the Assessing Officer ssessment Year 2017-18 contained i with Section 151(ii) of the new regime a f the Assessing Officer to issue a not of the Act. Accordingly, the orde passed under Section 148A(d) of the l reassessment proceedings and the ord passed under Section 147 read with Sec re quashed as bad in law being violat ontained in Section 148A(d), Section i) of the Act. Thus, Cross-Objection rais allowed and accordingly, all the grounds in the departmental appeal in relation to he CIT(A) on merits are dismissed as ha uctuous.”
y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
9
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
uri iction rity is a uri iction end of the 1st March
0th March tion 3(1) of tion 151(i)
30 th June
2, passed aforesaid
Principal order was nd of the egime, the e. Principal equired to ce, dated
Act (new
Principal de that in y authority ead of the gime.
with the in Section affects the tice under er, dated e Act, the der, dated ction 144B tive of the 148 and ed by the raised by o the relief aving been 4.3 In view of th proceedings in the c
No. 5 of the appeal of 4.4 Since we have a the other grounds academic and therefo
5. In the result, th
Order pronoun (KAVITHA RA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 27/03/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
Ajay
IT he aforesaid discussion, the case of the assessee are quash f the assessee is accordingly allo already quashed the reassessme raised by the assessee are r ore we are not adjudicating upon he appeal of the assessee is allow ced in the open Court on 27/0
d/-
AJAGOPAL)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu y Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd
10
TA No. 587/MUM/2025
e reassessment hed. The ground owed.
ent proceedings, endered merely n the same.
wed.
03/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai