IVA NARAYAN,KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), MALDA, WEST BENGAL, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘एसएमसी’ Ûयायपीठ,कोलकाता
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT

आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1246/KOL/2025
(Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2016-2017)
Iva Narayan
2B, Vishnu Niwas,
220 NSC Bose Road, Kolkata
West Bengal-700047
Vs
ITO Ward-3(1), Malda
PAN No. :AADCB 5095 Q
(अपीलाथȸ /Appellant)
..
(Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent)

Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से /Assessee by :
Shri Akash Ojha, AR
राजèव कȧ ओर से /Revenue by :
Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. DR
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing
:
13/10/2025
घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement
:
21/11/2025
आदेश / O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 14.05.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. At the outset, ld. AR submitted that the assessment framed by the AO u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act is not sustainable as the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act is barred by limitation. The ld.CIT(A) also without considering the same dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It was the submission of the ld.AR that notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued on the assessee on 20.07.2022. Ld. AR drew my attention to notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, copy of which has been filed at page 8 of the paper book. Ld. AR further submitted that the impugned assessment year is A.Y.2016-2017. It was the submission that notice issued u/s.148 of the Act was issued as a consequence of the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal, reported in (2022) 444 ITR
2
1(SC). It was the submission that the decision of the Honourable
Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) has been clarified in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal, reported in [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC). In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv
Bansal, referred to supra, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act as barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and in consequence thereof the assessment order so also the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) are liable to be quashed. Ld. AR further drew my attention to page 1 of the paper book wherein the limitation table has been brought out. The same reads as follows :-
3
3. In reply, ld.Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A).
4. I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the facts of the present case it is clear that the period excluded as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, referred to supra, is 28.06.2021 to 08.06.2022. Consequent to the same the time limit for issuance of the notice u/s.148 of the Act in the impugned appeal would be 13.06.2022. However, as it is noticed that the notice has been issued only on 20.07.2022, therefore, the same is barred by limitation. Consequently, notice u/s.148 of the Act is held to be barred by limitation and the same stands quashed. Accordingly, the assessment order passed as a consequence of said notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, also stands quashed. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21/11/2025. (DUVVURU RL REDDY)

उपाÚय¢ / VICE PRESIDENT
Ǒदनांक Dated 21/11/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

(