ARUN GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCOT CIRCLE 49(1), , DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4702/DEL/2025Status: HeardITAT Delhi24 December 2025AY 2015-16Bench: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was barred by limitation as it was issued beyond the prescribed period. Therefore, the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a NIL income tax return for Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order making an addition of Rs. 2,44,46,305/-. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. Subsequently, the assessee filed the present appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the notice issued under Section 148 was barred by limitation given the period prescribed for completion of assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 148A(b)

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

Before: YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 23/12/2025Pronounced: 24/12/2025

(A.Y. 2015-16) Arun Gupta Vs DCIT C/o C. S. Anand, Adv B-81, First Circle-49(1) Floor (Part-B), Defence Colony, Civic Centre, BhishmaPitamah Marg, New Minto Road, Delhi Delhi-24 PAN: AEHPG9780Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 24/12/2025 ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), dated 14/07/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that,the Assessee filed NIL income tax return for the year under consideration. An assessment order came to be passed u/s 147 r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 12/05/2023 by making an addition of Rs. 2,44,46,305/- by estimating income @ 8% on the amount credited to the Assessee considering the same as profit. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 12/05/2023, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14/07/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee.As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 27/07/2022 was barred by limitation and the last date of issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act was 27/07/2022, thus relying on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Rajiv Bansal (469 ITR 46), sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the Assessee has not appeared before the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) and the above ground urged by the Assessee was not raised before any of the authority, therefore, sought for remanding the issue involved in the present Appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the present case, the Ld. A.O. had issued a notice dated 23/06/2021 u/s 148 of the Act, under the old regime.

Further, the Ld. A.O had issued a letter-cum-notice dated 31/05/2022 u/s 148A(b) of the Act, in response to which the Assessee had filed his reply dated 14/06/2022. Thereafter, the Ld. A.O had passed an order dated 27/07/2022 u/s 148 of the Act. The Notice u/s 148 for Assessment Year 2015-16 could have been issued within 6 years from the end of the assessment year i.e. on or before 31.03.2022. However, in the case of the Assessee, the notice u/s 148 had been issued on 27/07/2022, which is barred by limitation.

6.

Further, in the case of Union of India and others vs. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46), the Ld. Additional Solicitor General of India made certain submissions on behalf of the Revenue before Hon'ble Supreme Court which have been reproduced in the said Judgment inPara 19.

In sub Para (f) of Para 19 of the said Judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recorded the submission of the Additional Solicitor General which reads as under:-

‘The Revenue concedes that for the Assessment Year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA.’

7.

In view of the above, as the notice u/s 148 of the Act has been issued on 27/07/2022 i.e. beyond period of six months from the end of Assessment Year i.e. 31/03/2022, the notice dated 148 of the Act is barred by limitation. Accordingly, we set aside the assessment order and the order of the Ld. CIT (A).

8.

Further, as the Assessee has committed default both before the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT (A) we deem it fit to impose the cost of Rs. 3,000/- on the Assessee which shall be payable to Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund.

9.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th December, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →