What is Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal authority for?

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

How many judgments cite Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal?

524 judgments on BharatTax cite Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (444 ITR 1), spanning 2022 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 147, Section 148A, Section 151, Section 149, Section 144B.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (444 ITR 1)

Rajbir Singh, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3104/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Rajbir Singh Vs. Acit 1625A, The Magnolia, Dlf Central Circle-19, City, Phase-V, Gurgaon, Khandewalan, Haryana New Delhi Pan: Aaups2176H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Amarjeet Singh, Ca Revenue By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2025 Order

Section 13ASection 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

…31.03 .2021 but under the un- amended provisions relating to the re-assessment o f income that had escaped assessment 4 . The Revenue appealed the decision s rendered by various High Courts to the Supreme Court o f India. In Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal: 2022 SCC OnLine SC 543 - which was one of such appeals arising from the decision of the Allahabad High Court - the Supreme Court delivered its decision on 04 .05 .2022, whereby it concurred with the view that the amended provisions which came into force after 31.03 .2021 would be applicable to notices issued thereafter. However, the Supreme Court also issued…

Genesis Associates P Ltd, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, Del-W-()

In the result Assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 952/DEL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…1 ITA Nos. 952 & 1084/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Genesis Associates P. Ltd., Vs Assessment Unit, 19, Furniture Block Kirti Nagar, EL-W-(42)(1) New Delhi-110015. PAN: AAACG 4978 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Unit, Vs Genesis Associates P. Ltd., EL-W-(42)(1) 19, Furniture Block Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015. PAN: AAACG 4978 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Ms. Agni Chaudhary, Adv.; & Shri Raghav Sharma, CA Departme…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), I.P Estate vs. Genesis Associates Pvt. Ltd., Kirti Nagar

In the result Assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 1084/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…1 ITA Nos. 952 & 1084/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Genesis Associates P. Ltd., Vs Assessment Unit, 19, Furniture Block Kirti Nagar, EL-W-(42)(1) New Delhi-110015. PAN: AAACG 4978 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Unit, Vs Genesis Associates P. Ltd., EL-W-(42)(1) 19, Furniture Block Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015. PAN: AAACG 4978 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Ms. Agni Chaudhary, Adv.; & Shri Raghav Sharma, CA Departme…

Sandeep Gupta, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 299/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Agni Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 299/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2017-18] Sandeep Gupta Vs. The I.T.O C-602, Second Floor, Ward – 36(1) Gali No. 13, Adarsh Nagar New Delhi Delhi PAN – AXHPS 1807 R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Agni Choudhary, Adv Shri Raghav Sharma, CA Department By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, A.M:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the…

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3633/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 194LSection 1ISection 260Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)

…dissolved company, (b) they proceed on notices that were invalidly served, (c) they ignore treaty protection despite TRCs and FPI approvals, and (d) they fail to comply with the mandatory Sec.148A procedure laid down in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC). Aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present appeals before the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi (ITA Nos. 3632/DEL/2025 & 3633/DEL/2025). The appeals assail the reassessments as void ab initio, ITAT Appeals reiterating the admitted facts April 2025 - - Filed recorded by the High Court, and without prejudice, challenge the additions on merits. The appea…

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3632/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 194LSection 1ISection 260Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)

…dissolved company, (b) they proceed on notices that were invalidly served, (c) they ignore treaty protection despite TRCs and FPI approvals, and (d) they fail to comply with the mandatory Sec.148A procedure laid down in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC). Aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present appeals before the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi (ITA Nos. 3632/DEL/2025 & 3633/DEL/2025). The appeals assail the reassessments as void ab initio, ITAT Appeals reiterating the admitted facts April 2025 - - Filed recorded by the High Court, and without prejudice, challenge the additions on merits. The appea…

Pjp Founation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 5000/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 147Section 250

…section 149 of the Act 3 Order of the Hon’ble 04/05/2022 Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal 4 Show cause notice was 27/05/2022 issued in accordance with the decision in the case of Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal reported in (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) and the appellant was granted time upto 10.06.2022 5 Order passed by the Ld. 22/07/2022 JAO u/s 148A(d) of the Act 6 Notice issued u/s 148 of 22/07/2022 the Act – New Provisions The Ld. AR, during the course of arguments, submitted that the notice issued by the Ld. AO for A.Y. 2015-16 has been quashed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case…

Aarti Bansal, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 5942/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5942/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Aarti Bansal Income Tax Officer, Bn-44, Shalimar Bagh, Vs. Ward 34(1), New Delhi. Civic Centre, Delhi. Pan No.Acvpb0393C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…021 could not have been issued after 31.03.2021. This issue per se was subject matter of various writ petitions filed in various High Courts and ultimately got settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal reported in 444 ITR 1 (SC) dated 04.05.2022. Thereafter, the Id AO issued letter u/s 148A(b) of the Act on 26.05.2022 (PB 8-10). The assessee filed its reply on 10.06.2022 (PB 11-18). The Id AO passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 22.07.2022 (PB 19-26) rejecting the objections of the assessee 3 and proceeded to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act on 22.07.2022 (PB 2…

R S Construction, Mumbai vs. Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4918/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.4918/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s R S Construction Vs. Income Tax Officer Room 16, A Basuwala Ward 41(3)(3), CHS Kokni Pada, Kurar Mumbai Village, Malad East, Income Tax Mumbai-400097 Department, National PAN:AATFR3944H Faceless Appeals Centre (NFAC), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Fenil Bhat Respondent by Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT D.R. Date of Hearing 15.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.…

ACIT(It)-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Barclays Execution Services Limited, London

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4253/MUM/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT (IT)-1(2)(1) Vs. Barclays Execution Mumbai Services Limited 1, Churchill Place London, United Kingdom PAN/GIR No.AAECB2079H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) CO No.235/Mum/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.4253/Mum/2025) (Assessment Year :2017-18) Barclays Execution Vs. ACIT (IT)-1(2)(1) Services Limited Mumbai 1, Churchill Place London, United Kingdom PAN/GIR No.AAECB2079H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue by Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT…

Sofia Twist and Text Pvt Ltd, Surat vs. DCIT Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 739/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sofia Twist & Text Pvt Ltd, Dcit, Circle – 2(1)(1) 3003, Rathi Palace, Kamela Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, Darwaja, Ring Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Majurgate, Surat - 395002 Surat - 395002 Pan No. Aadcs4384F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Suresh K Kabra, CA

Section 148Section 151Section 68

…giving effect to the directions giving effect to the directions ITA No. 3 Sofia Twist and Text Pvt Ltd. Sofia Twist and Text Pvt Ltd. of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Union of India v. Ashish of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Agarwal [2022 SCC OnLine SC 543]. [2022 SCC OnLine SC 543]. It was contended that the It was contended that the law laid down in Ashish Agarwal Ashish Agarwal (supra) carved out a limited carved out a limited survival period within which the Revenue could validly issue survival period within which the Revenue could validly issue survival period within which the Reven…

Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 272/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel, Ito Ward-2(3)(2), 84, Angreji Faliyu, Opp. Post Income Tax Office, Majura Gate, Office, Amroli, Surat-394107. Vs. Surat-395001. Pan No. Bczpp 8713 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate

Section 148Section 50C

…It was contended that, in the light of th that, in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme e judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union Union of India and others Vs Ashish of India and others Vs Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) and Union of India v. Rajiv Bansal & Union of India v. Rajiv Bansal & Others, (2024) 469 ITR 46(SC) (2024) 469 ITR 46(SC) the impugned notice issued under the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) stands vitiated tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) stands vitiated…

Wudstay Travels Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 25(1), New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2996/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Wudstay Travels Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Limited D8/4 First Floor, Of Income Tax Circle 25 (1) Exclusive Floors Dlf Phase New Delhi -5 Gurgaon Dlf Qe So Gurgaon Pan No. Aabcw6379A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 69

…by Principal Commissioner were to be quashed and set aside. 6. The Ld. Sr. DR has relied the order of the lower authorities and submitted that the notice/ order was issued as per the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal [2022] 444 ITR 1 SC. In the present case the notice was issued on 21-07-2022 for the A.Y. 2017-18 from the prior approval of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 07 Delhi, without, the approval of the authority specified u/s 151 of the Act. The notice was issued beyond the period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, thus in term of section 151…

Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant CIT, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 368/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan Sshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.368/Viz/2025 (Assessment Year 2016-17) (Assessment Year 2016-17) Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, H. No. 27-32-27, Raghu Paints, Mudda Subbaiah Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada ............... Appellant Pan: Aeepc5404L V/S Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1), ……………… Respondent C R Building, 1St Floor Annex, M.G. Road, Vijayawada Assessee By : Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 28

…he transaction as commission, the AO issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 29/06/2021, as the assessee was one such dealer. 8. Subsequently, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, reported in [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC), the ITAs No.367 & 368/Viz/2025 (A.Ys. 2016-17) 4 original notice issued under section 148 on 29/06/2021 was deemed to be issued under section 148A(b) of the Act. Vide show cause notice dated 27/05/2022, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue were provided to the assessee and time was granted to the assessee to respond on or…

Siva Durga Vara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 367/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan Sshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.368/Viz/2025 (Assessment Year 2016-17) (Assessment Year 2016-17) Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, H. No. 27-32-27, Raghu Paints, Mudda Subbaiah Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada ............... Appellant Pan: Aeepc5404L V/S Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1), ……………… Respondent C R Building, 1St Floor Annex, M.G. Road, Vijayawada Assessee By : Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 28

…he transaction as commission, the AO issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 29/06/2021, as the assessee was one such dealer. 8. Subsequently, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, reported in [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC), the ITAs No.367 & 368/Viz/2025 (A.Ys. 2016-17) 4 original notice issued under section 148 on 29/06/2021 was deemed to be issued under section 148A(b) of the Act. Vide show cause notice dated 27/05/2022, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue were provided to the assessee and time was granted to the assessee to respond on or…

ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Alex Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2198/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2197 & 2198/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata…………..…………………………….…….……Appellant Vs. Alex Tradecom Pvt. Ltd…………..……………….………...……...…..…..Respondent 4, Ratan Sarkar Garden Street, Burrabazar, Kol- 700069. [Pan: Aajca6146P] Appearances By: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Against Separate Orders Dated 05.08.2024 & 26.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue With Delays Of 38 Days. The Revenue Has Filed Separate Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid And

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…ment year 2013-14 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer by issuing original notice on 28.06.21 as per old regime and after that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64/286 Taxman 183/444 ITR 1 (SC) wherein it has been held that notices issued u/s 148 of the Act considered the period from 01-04-2021 to 30-06-2021 under old regime are deemed to be show-cause notice issued u/s 148A(b) under the new regime and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the opportunity in respect of such notice. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer provided the in…

ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata vs. Alex Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2197/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2197 & 2198/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata…………..…………………………….…….……Appellant Vs. Alex Tradecom Pvt. Ltd…………..……………….………...……...…..…..Respondent 4, Ratan Sarkar Garden Street, Burrabazar, Kol- 700069. [Pan: Aajca6146P] Appearances By: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Against Separate Orders Dated 05.08.2024 & 26.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue With Delays Of 38 Days. The Revenue Has Filed Separate Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid And

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…ment year 2013-14 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer by issuing original notice on 28.06.21 as per old regime and after that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64/286 Taxman 183/444 ITR 1 (SC) wherein it has been held that notices issued u/s 148 of the Act considered the period from 01-04-2021 to 30-06-2021 under old regime are deemed to be show-cause notice issued u/s 148A(b) under the new regime and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the opportunity in respect of such notice. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer provided the in…

Sahdev Gupta, New Delhi vs. Faceless Assessment, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 4234/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4234/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 बनाम Sahdev Gupta, Faceless Assessment, 6/855, Main Bazar, Mehrauli, Vs. New Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Acspg7739G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149

…uashed. (ii) That the notice dated 26.07.2022 issued u/s 148 of the Act seeking reassessment for AY 2013-14 is barred by limitation as per 1st proviso to section 149 of the Act, as interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal 444 ITR 1 and Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46. (iii) That the surviving period after considering all exclusions as per the ratio of decision in Rajeev Bansal (supra) and as per 4th proviso to section 149, was 7 days which expired on 09.06.2022. (iv) That pursuant to expiry of limitation on 09.06.2022, the Respondent ceased to have jurisdiction to…

Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1371/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1371/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(1), बनाम/ Patel Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Vs. Patidar Faliyu, Bhestan Gam, Gate, Surat-395 001 Choryasi, Surat- 395 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bispp 4863 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri P.M. Jagasheth, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…s re-opened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 21.04.2021. Notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by AO on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, 444 ITR 1 (SC). 3.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, notices were issued to the assessee u/s.142(1) of the Act, however, no compliance was made by the assessee to any of these notices. Therefore, AO was left with no option other than finalizing the assessment proceedings on the basis of material available on records. Since the assessee remained…

Ajit Pal Singh Choudhary, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 43(1), Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3395/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwal Accoutant Member Assessment Year: 2016-17 Ajit Pal Singh Choudhary Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of A-139, Meera Bagh New Income Tax Circle 43(1) Delhi 110087 Pan No. Acrpc1266D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 151ASection 153CSection 156Section 157ASection 69

…8 was issued on 30-06-2021 for the A.Y. 2016-17 under the old reassessment tax regime, however due to the introduction of new reassessment tax regime from 01-04-2021 and in the compliance of the Hon’ble Supreme Court Order in the case of Ashish Agarwal [2022] 444 ITR 1 SC, notice dated 04-05-2022 u/s 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 22-05- 2022 and consequent order was passed under section 148A(d) of the Act on 18-07-2022 subsequently, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 19-07-2022. The case of the assessee relates to the A.Y. 2016-17 and the order was passed on 18-07-2022 and notice u/s 148 of the Act was is…

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal

What is Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal

Rajbir Singh, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi

Genesis Associates P Ltd, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, Del-W-()

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), I.P Estate vs. Genesis Associates Pvt. Ltd., Kirti Nagar

Sandeep Gupta, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre, Delhi

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

Argos Holdings Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi

Pjp Founation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

Aarti Bansal, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1), Delhi

R S Construction, Mumbai vs. Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ACIT(It)-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Barclays Execution Services Limited, London

Sofia Twist and Text Pvt Ltd, Surat vs. DCIT Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

Jigneshbhai Arvindbhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(2), Surat

Wudstay Travels Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 25(1), New Delhi

Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant CIT, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

Siva Durga Vara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Alex Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata

ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata vs. Alex Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata

Sahdev Gupta, New Delhi vs. Faceless Assessment, New Delhi

Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

Ajit Pal Singh Choudhary, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 43(1), Delhi