PUNEET SAGGAR,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA, PUNJAB, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset submitted that issue in dispute is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs Rajiv Bansal reported in 167 taxmann.com 70. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that though appeal of the assessee was dismissed for want of prosecution by ld. CIT(A) but assessment year involved herein is 2015-16 and in this year, re-opening ought to have not been made if notice was issued after 31.03.2021.

On the other hand, ld. DR was unable to controvert the contention of ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. The assessee has filed its return of income electronically on 30.09.2015 declaring total income at Rs.9,73,710/-. The ld. AO sought to reopen the assessment by issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 28.07.2022. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has pointed out that Hon'ble Supreme Court has A.Y. 2015-16 3 considered the issue whether assessment for assessment year 2015-16 could be reopened with help of TOLA after 01.04.2021. Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 19 at clause (f) has observed that “Revenue has conceded that for assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 will have to be dropped as they will not form for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA”.

In view of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court and the specific stand of the Revenue at Sr.No. (f) of the finding recorded in paragraph No. 19 of the judgement, the re- opening in the present case is not sustainable. The simple reason is that notice under Section 148 was issued on 28.07.2022 and it is time barred. Accordingly, we allow this appeal of the assessee and quash the re-assessment order.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.