BANGAMATA TIE-UP PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO 13(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1332/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 October 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)4 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 on July 31, 2022, was beyond the period of limitation for AY 2015-16. It noted that the relaxation provided by TOLA from April 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021, was not applicable to this assessment year, relying on Apex Court decisions. Consequently, the reopening of assessment and the assessment framed were quashed as time-barred.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment for AY 2015-16 was reopened based on information about suspicious bank transactions and alleged accommodation entries totaling Rs. 2.17 crore. A notice under Section 148 was issued on July 31, 2022, after an initial notice in 2021 and subsequent Supreme Court orders, leading to an addition of the said amount, which was affirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the reopening notice was time-barred.

What were the issues?

Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reopening assessment for AY 2015-16 was time-barred, given the inapplicability of the TOLA relaxation period for that specific assessment year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 149,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia, AR
For Respondent: Shri Soumitra Ghosh, DR
Hearing: 21.08.2025Pronounced: 28.10.2025

O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 06.05.2025 for the AY 2015-16.

That your assessee craves to plead an additional ground with the leave of this Tribunal under Rule 11 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 and ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC 229 ITR 383. That the Ld. AO erred in issuing notice under section 148 beyond the time limit prescribed under section 149 and settled in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) That since the above ground goes to the root of the matter and permeates from facts already on record before the lower authorities and this Hon'ble Tribunal, your assessee prays for the admission of the same in the interest of justice.

2.

The only issue raised by the Counsel of the assessee is in respect of A.Y. 2015-16, being time barred by limitation in consonance with the

3.

The facts in brief are that the case of the assessee was reopened upon credible information regarding suspicious transactions in the bank account of the assessee maintained with ICICI bank Ltd. bearing A/c No.000605026646, was received through the Insight Portal. Upon considering the submission of assessee during the course of proceedings u/s 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), it was established that assessee had received amount of Rs.2,17,50,000/- from companies, which were struck off by ROC. The contention of the assessee was not accepted and the case was reopened as assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries. Accordingly, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated vide notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 29.06.2021. Thereafter notice u/s 148 was issued on 31/07/2022 in consequence of Hon’ble SC order dated 04/05/2022 in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal which was served to the assessee and was complied with. Accordingly, the assessment was framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144/144B of the Act vide order dated 19.05.2023 by making an addition of Rs. 2,17,50,000/- which was also affirmed by ld. CIT(A).

4.

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 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

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 31.07.2022 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 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 the reopening 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

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.10.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →