SWAMI VIVEKANAND COLLEGE,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-4(4), THANE

1. This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 09.09.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short), Delhi for the assessment year (A.Y. for short) 2015-16.

In ground no. 1, the assessee has challenged the validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act, being barred by limitation. Identical issue has been raised by the assessee through an additional ground filed on 12.12.2025. Since, the issue raised by the assessee is a purely legal and jurisdictional issue going to the root of the matter and can be decided based on the facts available on record, we are inclined to admit the additional ground for adjudication and proceed to decide it at the very outset.

Though, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. first appellate authority, challenging the assessment order, however, the appeal was dismissed.

Before us, ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the A.O. had no power to reopen the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act under the old regime after expiry of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. He submitted, since the assessment year involved is A.Y. 2015-16, the A.O. could have reopened the assessment by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on or before 31.03.2022. That having not been done, the A.O. losses his power to reopen the assessment. In support of such contention, ld. Counsel relied upon the following decisions:

We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue arising for consideration lies within a narrow compass. In the facts of the present appeal, admittedly, the assessment year involved is A.Y. 2015-16. The A.O. passed the order u/s. 148A(d) and issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 13.04.2022, which is beyond the period of six years from the end of the assessment year under dispute. The issue which arises for consideration is, whether the time limit prescribed under the old regime could have been extended by Taxation and Other Laws [Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions] (TOLA). While deciding identical nature of dispute, in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (supra) Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the concession made by ld. Additional Solicitor General had held that the provisions of TOLA would not be applicable upto A.Y. 2015-16. Hence, the limitation to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act expires on 31.03.2022. Following the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court as afore- said, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma vs. ITO (supra) has held that notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act after 31.03.2022 in respect of A.Y. 2015-16 is barred by limitation. The other decisions cited by ld. AR lay down the same principle.

In view of the aforesaid, we hold that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act in the present case is barred by limitation, hence, void-ab-initio. As a natural corollary, the consequential proceedings based on such notice including the impugned assessment order are equally void-ab-initio. Accordingly, we quash it. The appeal is allowed on this limited issue. The other grounds having been rendered academic are kept open.