INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(3), NEW DELHI vs. KOLAHAI INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED , NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3399/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 November 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)15 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings for AY 2015-16 were barred by limitation, following the Supreme Court's stance in the Rajeev Bansal case where the Revenue conceded that such notices would have to be dropped. Therefore, the assessment order was annulled.

What were the facts?

The assessee company filed its return for AY 2015-16, and the assessment was completed. Later, the case was reopened, and a notice under Section 148 was issued on 28-07-2022. The Assessing Officer made additions under Section 68, but the CIT(A) allowed the assessee's appeal, holding the proceedings barred by limitation.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation, considering the provisions of TOLA and the concession made by the Revenue before the Supreme Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 149,Section 68,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 BENCH “E” NEWDELHI

Before: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Ms. Sita Srivastava, CIT, DR
For Respondent: Ms. Ananya Kapoor Advocate
Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 19.11.2025
5.

Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the impugned proceedings is barred by limitation in view of the judgment dated 03-10-2024 rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of union Of India and others vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024 SCC on Line SC 2693]. In this case the revenue conceded that for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after April1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under Taxation and other Laws (TOLA). The ld. AR also submitted the following details of the notices and order passed u/s 148A(b) of the Act.

1.

Notice u/s 148 of the Act under old regime was issued on 22-04-2021 Response filed by the assessee on 28-05-2022 & 17-06-2022 Order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 28-07-2022 Notice issued u/s 148 Of the Act on 28-07-2022 Assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was completed on 19- 05-2023. He further submitted that the appeal was rightly allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) relying the judgment of Union Of India and others vs. Rajeev Bansal.

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition (civil)

Diary No. 59625/2024of Income Tax Officer ward-1 (2) Jaipur v. R.K.

Build Pvt. Ltd., its order dated 17-01-2025 dismissed the SLP arising from the similar decision rendered by the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court the Hon’ble Supreme court held that “ Delay Condoned.

Having regard to the concession made by the petitioner- Department in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, Civil Appeal no.8629 of 2024 on 03-10-2024(2024SCC ON LINE 754) this special leave Petition would not survive for further consideration. Hence, the special disposed of”.

7.In the case of Bhagwan Sahai Sharma v, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1) Delhi & Anr, the Hon’ble High Court in para 11 held that “in the present case, the impugned notice was issued on 30-07-2022 which is admittedly beyond the period of limitation as prescribed under section 149(1) of the Act, and TOLA is not applicable in respect of the said notice, as was conceded by the Revenue in the case of Union Of India V. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 INSC 754 (supra). The impugned notice is liable to be set aside.”

6.

Reliance has also placed on the followings judgments; (i)IBIBO groups Private Limited v. ACIT, circle 10(1) & Anr. W.P.

(C) 17639/2022 (ii) Pratishtha Garg v. ACIT, central Circle 25 Delhi (Delhi High Court)

(iii) Income tax officer , ward -62(1), New Delhi v. Girish Kumar Gupta ITAT Delhi No.5755 /Del/2024 7.We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In the present case the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 22-04-2021 for the A.Y.2015-16. The case of the assessee falls outside the period of completion prescribed under TOLA.

Ld. CIT(A) has examined the issue in the correct prospective and rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The reasoning and findings of the Ld. CIT(A), while granting relief is on proper appreciation of law expounded by the judicial dicta. We do not find any reasons to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal of the Revenue is liable to be dismissed.

8.

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/11/2025.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →