PARMOD KUMAR,DELHI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 18, DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3393/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 January 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI C.N. PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 for AY 2015-16 should be dropped as they would not fall for completion within the prescribed period. Therefore, the notice dated 27.04.2022 was barred by limitation.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee's counsel argued that the proceedings initiated by a notice dated 27.04.2022 under Section 148 of the Act for AY 2015-16 were time-barred.

What were the issues?

Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2015-16, dated 27.04.2022, is time-barred as per Section 149(1)(a) of the Act?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 149(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, DELHI BENCH, ‘E’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.11.2025Pronounced: 14.01.2026

Year: 2015-16] Parmod Kumar, Vs. Central Circle 18 B-10, Vinoba Kunj, Sector- Delhi 9, Rohini, Naharpur, North West Delhi-110085 PAN No. AEQPK9723A Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Vivek Kumar, CA Revenue by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2026 ORDER

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM,

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi vide order dated 31.01.2025 for the A.Y. 2015-16.

2.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that proceedings initiated under notice dated 27.04.2022 u/s.148 of the Act for the A.Y.2015-16 are time barred as per section 149(1)(a) of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Union of India and Others Vs. Rajeev Bansal [469 ITR 46] submitted that as a matter of fact the revenue conceded that for the A.Y. 2015-16 all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under Taxation and other laws (Realizations and Amendment of Certain provision) Act 2010.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, therefore, submitted that the notice dated 27.04.2022 which was validated by virtue of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Ashish Agarwal cannot survive since the TOLA provision do not apply for the A.Y.2015-16. We find force in the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. Since, the revenue has conceded that for the A.Y.2015-16, all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 will have to be dropped the notice issued in the present case dated 27.04.2022 which was issued after 01.04.2021 and was validated by the virtue of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal, the proceedings fall for completion. Thus, we hold that the notice dated 27.04.2022 issued u/s.148 of the Act is barred by limitation and consequently the assessment made pursuant to such notice is void ab initio and the same is quashed.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 14.01.2026.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →