Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's case was reopened based on information about significant cash deposits in bank accounts for AY 2014-15. The assessee filed a return of income after a notice under section 148 was issued, and subsequently failed to provide requested details, claiming non-receipt of notices.
Held
The Tribunal held that the notice for reopening the assessment under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, issued on 13.04.2022, was barred by limitation. This was based on the Supreme Court's decision in 'Union of India and others Vs. Rajeev Bansal' which held that the benefit of TOLA (Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020) was not available for AY 2015-16 for reopening beyond the prescribed period.
Key Issues
The primary issue was whether the reopening of the assessment for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation, considering the applicability of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
Sections Cited
148, 147, 143(2), 142(1), 44AD, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" BENCH, KOLKATA
BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
ITA No.1805/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2015-16)
Sri Sukumar Kuity
C/O, M/s, Salarpuria Jajodia & CO.7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor,
NFAC
Vs. North Block, New Delhi-110001
Kolkata-700072, West Bengal
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN No. AIXPK5035G
Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Jhajharia, AR Revenue by : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
> Date of hear ing: 20 .01 .2026 Date of pronouncement: 26 .02.2026
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 12.06.2025 for the AY 2015-16.
- 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 decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and other Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC), dated 03.10.2024. - 3. The facts in brief are that the case of the assessee was reopened upon credible information regarding cash deposited in bank account
maintained with SBI of ₹10,08,000/- and Union bank of India of ₹46,35,100/- for A.Y. 2014-15 but not filed any return of income, as received through the Insight Portal. Upon considering the submissions of assessee during the course of proceedings u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the assessee filed the return of income on 09.05.2022, declaring total income of ₹2,12,240/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, however, the assessee failed to furnish the details as called for. Thereafter, the assessee on 14.12.2023 submitted that the notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) and letters issued on different dates prior to the show cause notice dated 07.11.2023 to the assessee had not been received. The assessee submitted that assessee had a small business eligible u/s 44AD of the Act and most of the sale proceeds of the business of the assessee were received in cash. The contention of the assessee was not accepted and the case was reopened. Since no retrun was filed by the assessee , the source of such cash deposit remained unexplained. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 13.04.2022 was issued and the assessment was framed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act vide order dated 17.01.2024 by determining the total income at ₹58,55,340/- which was also affirmed by ld. CIT(A).
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 been held that reopening of assessment for 2015-16 is not permissible in the extended period as per TOLA on and from 01.04.2021. The said decision has been followed by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Orbit Financial Capital, ITA No. 5812/M/2024. The ld. AR submitted that even the Coordinate Bench in the case of Coplama Products Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1806/Kol/2024 pronounced on 31.01.2025 has followed the said decision. Thereafter, the Rajasthan High Court in WP No. 3667 of 2023 vide its order dated 27.01.2025 has taken the similar view. The Ld. AR, also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Steel & Power Ltd Vs CBDT (2025) 174 taxmann.com 144(SC) and therefore, prayed that the assessment framed may kindly be quashed.
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 13.04.2022which 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 limitation and is accordingly quashed. The assessment framed is also quashed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.02.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR)
(JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
Kolkata, Dated: 26.02.2026
Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
- 1. The Appellant - 2. The Respondent - 3. CIT - 4. DR, ITAT, - 5. Guard file.
BY ORDER,
True Copy//
Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata