Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee filed an appeal against an assessment order for Assessment Year 2015-16, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary challenge was to the validity and limitation of the notice issued under Section 148 on 05.04.2022, citing a concession made by the Solicitor General before the Supreme Court.
Held
The Tribunal quashed the notice under Section 148 dated 05.04.2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16. This decision was based on the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's ruling in Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma, which relied on the Supreme Court's concession that all notices under Section 148 issued after 01.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2015-16 should be dropped. Consequently, other grounds of appeal became academic and were dismissed unadjudicated.
Key Issues
Whether the notice issued under Section 148 on 05.04.2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16 was barred by limitation and thus invalid, in light of judicial precedents and the Revenue's concession.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B, 148, 148A, 149, 151A, 80P, 139(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Vardhaman Nagri V The Income Tax Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., s Officer, 1061, Shivaji Chowk, Ward-1(4), Pune. Bhadgaon Road, Pachora, Maharashtra – 424201. PAN: AACAS3361F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Vinay Kawdia – (Virtual hearing) Revenue by Shri Sandeep Sathe - DR Date of hearing 08/12/2025 Date of pronouncement 30/12/2025 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2015-16 dated 22.10.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 18.03.2024. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 issued on 05.04.22 for AY 2015-16 is barred by limitation in view of the first proviso to section 149 of the Act and therefore liable to be quashed.
2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, assessment made in respect of an issue that was not disclosed in notice issued u/s 148A(b) is bad in law and liable to be quashed.
3) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, notice u/s. 148 Dt. 05.04.2022 issued by ITO, Ward 1(4), Jalgaon is bad law and void-ab-initio for want of jurisdiction in view of Section 151A read with CBDT Notification dt. 29.03.2022.
4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 5,24,355/- made by AO u/s 80P of the Act on the ground that assessee has not submitted its ITR as per the provisions of Sec. 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by relying on the decision in case of M/s. Nileshwar Rangekallu Chethu Thozhilali Vyavasaya Sahakarana Sangham [2023] 152 taxmann.com 347 (Kerala), facts of which are not applicable to the instant case.
5) The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Ld.AR brought to our notice that in the case of assessee for A.Y.2015-16 notice u/s.148 was issued on 05.04.2022. Order under 2 section 148A(d) was passed on 05.04.2022. Ld.AR filed copies of [A] these in the paper book at page no.27 to 31. Ld.AR submitted that as per the concession made by Solicitor General before Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal, no notice for A.Y.2015- 16 can be issued after 01.04.2021. Ld.AR relied on the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma Vs. ITO [2025] 179 taxmann.com 433 (Bom).
Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue candidly accepted that this particular issue is covered against Revenue.
It is noted that for A.Y.2015-16, notice u/s.148 was issued on 05.04.2022 and order u/s.148A(d) was passed on 05.04.2022. Notice u/s.148A(b) was issued on 19.03.2022.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma Vs. ITO, International Tax, Mumbai [2025] 179 taxmann.com 433 (Bom) order dated 13.10.2025 has held as under : Quote“6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that the present petition relates toA.Y.2015-16. Further, it is also undisputed that the notice under Section 148 has been issued on 5th April 2022which is at page 52 of the paperbook. Once these are the facts, paragraphs 19 (e) and (f) of the judgment ofthe Hon'ble Supreme 3 Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (supra) become relevant. They read as under:- 19. Mr. N Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, made the following submissionson behalf of the Revenue:- a……… 7. From the above it is clear, that the Department has conceded before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that all thenotices issued under Section 148 after 1st April 2021 for A.Y.2015-16 have to be dropped. In the present case,the Notice under Section 148 is dated 5th April 2022 and therefore, has to be dropped.
8. The decision in Rajeev Bansal (supra) has been subsequently followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court inDeepak Steel and Power Ltd. (supra). Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said order is reproduced hereunder:- ……………….. 9……………….. 10………………. 11. In light of the above discussion, we find merit in the submissions as canvassed by the Petitioner. TheRevenue has categorically made a concession that for A.Y.2015-16 they would drop all notices issued underSection 148 after 1st April 2021. Once this is the position, it is appropriate that the notice under Section 148dated 5th April 2022, and the consequential assessment order, notice of demand, penalty notices/orders as wellas the recovery notices be quashed and set aside. It is accordingly so ordered.”Unquote. (emphasis supplied) 5.1 Thus, Hon’ble Bombay High Court has quashed the notice u/s.148 dated 05.04.2022 for A.Y.2015-16 in the case of Cherian
Since the facts in the case of present assessee are identical to the facts of the Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma(supra), respectfully following Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, we quash the notice u/s.148 dated 05.04.2022 for A.Y.2015-16. Accordingly, Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee is allowed.
Since we have decided the Ground No.1 in favour of the Assessee, all other grounds become academic in nature, hence, all other grounds are dismissed unadjudicated.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30 December, 2025.