A. B. MOTORS PVT. LTD. ,PATIALA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE, PATIALA , PATIALA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, relying on a Supreme Court decision, held that reassessment notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 for AY 2015-16 are invalid and quashed the reopening of assessment u/s 148. Consequently, the related order passed u/s 263 was also quashed as its very foundation, an erroneous and prejudicial assessment, ceased to exist once the reassessment was quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment for AY 2015-16 was reopened u/s 148 on 12.04.2021, after information was received about undeclared discount/incentive of Rs. 2.64 Cr on which Service Tax was not paid. The assessee challenged this reopening as time-barred under TOLA. The appeal also covered an order passed u/s 263 related to the same assessment year.
What were the issues?
1. Whether a reassessment notice issued u/s 148 on 12.04.2021 for AY 2015-16 is valid given the limitations under TOLA. 2. Whether an order passed u/s 263 can be sustained when the underlying assessment on which it is based is quashed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 263,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal713 citing167 Taxmann.com 70 · 2024 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026