Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing it was time-barred. The notice was dated 06.04.2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16.
Held
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 was time-barred and therefore beyond jurisdiction. The subsequent assessment proceedings arising from this notice were vitiated and quashed.
Key Issues
Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2015-16, dated 06.04.2022, is barred by limitation?
Sections Cited
148, 147, 149, 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
Rajiv Babbar, Flat No.275, 2nd Floor, Gali No.4, Shakti Khand-4, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201014 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant PAN: AKSPB-5088-K बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(2), CGO Complex-II, Purani Hapur Chungi, ..... प्रधििािी/Respondent Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant by : S/Shri Sahil Sharma & Sanjay Prashar, Advocates प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR (Through VC) सुििाई की धिधर्थ/Date of hearing : 23/03/2026 घोषणा की धिधर्थ/Date of pronouncement : 23/03/2026 आिेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 27.11.2025, for Assessment Year 2015-16.
The solitary issue assailed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee in the present appeal is that the notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 06.04.2022 (at page 7 of the paper book) is time-barred. Hence, the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, in support of his submissions, placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sunita Salhotra vs. ITO in for A.Y. 2015-16, decided on 12.02.2025.
(A.Y.2015-16) 3. Both sides heard. The solitary issue assailed in this appeal is validity of the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act. Undisputedly, the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 06.04.2022. The provisions of sections 147 to 151 of the Act were amended by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Further, the provisions of the Act were relaxed to mitigate hardship faced by the assessees by introduction of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). The ld. Additional Solicitor General of India, in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal (167 taxmann.com 70) (SC) had made a statement at the Bar before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that for A.Y. 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 would have to be dropped as they would not fall within the period prescribed under TOLA. The Division Bench of the Tribunal, in the case of Sunita Salhotra vs. ITO (supra), in a similar set of facts where notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 25.07.2022 i.e. after 01.04.2021, held as under:
“Looking to the facts and considering the assessment year involved is 2015-16, notice issued in the case of originally on 30/06/2021 and later on 25/07/2022 which both the dates have fallen on or after 1st April, 2021, therefore, both the notice deserves to be dropped in view of the admission made by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Further, for Assessment Year 2015-16, no notice u/s 148 of the Act could be issued after the expiring of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year which limitation expired on 31st March, 2022. As the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal (supra) has observed that Tola is not applicable for Asst. Year 2015- 16, therefore, even otherwise under the old provisions of section 149 of the Act, the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act for Asst. Year 2015- 16 on 25/07/2022 is barred by limitation. In view of these facts, the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 25/07/2022 is hereby quashed. Accordingly, legal ground taken by the assessee is allowed.” Thus, in light of undisputed facts and decision discussed above, I hold that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act is beyond time, hence, without jurisdiction.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 23rd day of March, 2026.