Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return for AY 2015-16, which was initially assessed under Section 143(3). The case was later reopened by issuing a notice under Section 148 dated 22-04-2021. The reassessment order was passed on 19-05-2023 disallowing a sum of Rs. 163,00,00,000/- under Section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who allowed the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2015-16 were barred by limitation, following the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Rajeev Bansal. The notice issued under Section 148 was therefore considered invalid.
Key Issues
Whether the reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2015-16, initiated by a notice under Section 148 dated 22-04-2021, were barred by limitation, considering the provisions of TOLA and pronouncements of the Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal and Rajeev Bansal.
Sections Cited
139, 143(3), 14A, 148, 149, 147, 144B, 68, 115BBE, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(b), 3(1)
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.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E” NEWDELHI
Before: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
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.
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.”
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.
In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19/11/2025.