ARVINDKUMAR MAHENDRAKUMAR GOYAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), SURAT
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:
-
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act are bad in law.
The learned CIT (A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs. 34,87,850/- assuming undisclosed investment invoking section 69A of the Act on the base of dumb documents found and seized in the case of third party. The learned CIT (A) has not corroborated the alleged Investment for particular shop or flat or plot etc.
The learned CIT (A) grossly erred in presuming undisclosed investment though such presumption is available u/s. 132 (4A)/292C of the Act in the case of searched person only. Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 2–
The learned CIT (A) grossly erred in not confronting the statement related to that seized material in the case of third party and not allowing cross examination thereof.”
The details relating to the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act are summarized as under:- AY : 2019-20 Sr. Particulars Date
Notice u/s 148A(b) was issued 24.03.2023
Time allowed to reply to notice u/s 148A(b) 7 days
Three years from the end of relevant AY expired on 31.03.2023
Last date by which notice u/s 148 could be issued. 07.04.2023
Notice u/s 148 issued 10.04.2023
From the above facts, it is evident that the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 10.04.2023, which is beyond the limitation period prescribed under the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the notice issued under section 148 is time-barred and invalid.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, and respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) dated 03.10.2024, we hold that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act on 10.04.2023 is time-barred and, therefore, invalid in the eyes of law. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of such invalid notice are void ab initio and liable to be quashed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 30.01.2026 (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 30/01/2026 Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 3–
आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""थ" / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned CIT 3. 4. आयकर आयु" अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण /DR,ITAT, Surat, , , 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.
