Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

469 ITR 46Supreme Court of India2024#72 most cited

What is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal authority for?

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

713

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal · Section 148 notice limitation · Ashish Agarwal legal fiction · TOLA applicability · reassessment jurisdiction · time-barred notice · order without jurisdiction · Section 149 · Section 148A

Also reported as

167 Taxmann.com 70301 Taxmann 238

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 148ASection 151Section 149Section 144BSection 250Section 144
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 149a(c)section 149a(d)section 149asection 151(i)section 149(1)(a)section 3(1)section 148a(a)section 148 noticesection 151(ii)section 149(1)section 149(1)(b)order under section 148a(d)

Judgments citing Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

Genpact Services Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(3)(1), International Tax, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3480/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149

…tion of reassessment proceedings and order passed in consequence thereof bad in law and liable to be quashed.” 2.1 In support of this contention, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) which has been followed in many cases as listed in his written submission. In this regard, the written submission filed by the assessee is reproduced as under: “ 3. In Re: Ground No(s), 3 and 4: Re-assessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act are barred by limitation 3.1. A brief summary of timeline is provided below: Particulars Date…

Integrated Service Point Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1882/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद एवं माननीय "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम' BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 Integrated Service Point Ltd., The Dy./Asst. Commissioner of (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd.,) Central Circle-2(4), 6C, 6th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Chennai. Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai – 600 002. PAN: AAAC…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Integrated Service Point Limited, Anna Nagar

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1879/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद एवं माननीय "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम' BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 Integrated Service Point Ltd., The Dy./Asst. Commissioner of (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd.,) Central Circle-2(4), 6C, 6th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Chennai. Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai – 600 002. PAN: AAAC…

Jagathesh, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-1(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1566/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1565/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1566/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 183Section 197Section 271ASection 69A

…obtained approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vide Ref No.: C No.882 / PCIT – 8 / 2002-23 dated 22.07.2022. 36. After a careful reading of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra) and in UOI v Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) we note that in the present case the 3 year time limit for A.Y.2017-18 ended on 31.03.2021 which falls during the time between 20.03.2020 and 31.03.2021 as contemplated by section 3(1) of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). Since the 3 year period lapsed only on 31.03.2021 for the A.Y…

Jagathesh, Chennai vs. Aacit, Ncc-11(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1565/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1565/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1566/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 183Section 197Section 271ASection 69A

…obtained approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vide Ref No.: C No.882 / PCIT – 8 / 2002-23 dated 22.07.2022. 36. After a careful reading of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra) and in UOI v Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) we note that in the present case the 3 year time limit for A.Y.2017-18 ended on 31.03.2021 which falls during the time between 20.03.2020 and 31.03.2021 as contemplated by section 3(1) of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). Since the 3 year period lapsed only on 31.03.2021 for the A.Y…

Jayesh H. Sanghavi HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 33(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 6784/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jayesh H. Sanghavi Vs. ITO WARD 33(1) (1) HUF B-204, Sushil CHS Ltd., A.S. Marg, Ashok Nagar, Kandivali (E) Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No.AAFHJ3520B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ketan Vajani Revenue by Shri Adesh Rai, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 24/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 30/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, a…

Hemlata Mahendra Chavda, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 6770/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘ SMC ‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hemlata Mahendra Vs. ITO, WORD 19(2)(2), Chavda Mumbai 1st Floor, 22-B, Shakti Sadan Lamington Road Opp. Nav Jeevan Soc., Grant Road Mumbai-400007 PAN/GIR No.ACXPC9918J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Aditya Ramchandran Revenue by Shri. Sandeep Jumale-Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 30/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal has been preferred by the assessee assailing the order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the Nat…

Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), Ghaziabad vs. Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 3525/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…of the case and the fact that the assessee failed to furnish any reply to notice dated 17.05.2022. 5. The relevant Para of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 301 Taxman 238 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46(SC)[03-10-2024]are reproduced herein below:- "111. The clock started ticking (or the Revenue on Iv after it received the response of the assesses to the show cause notice. After the receipt of the reply, the assessing officer had to perform the following responsibilities: (i) consider the reply of the assessee under section 149A(c); (ii) take a de…

Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), Ghaziabad vs. Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 3495/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…of the case and the fact that the assessee failed to furnish any reply to notice dated 17.05.2022. 5. The relevant Para of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 301 Taxman 238 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46(SC)[03-10-2024]are reproduced herein below:- "111. The clock started ticking (or the Revenue on Iv after it received the response of the assesses to the show cause notice. After the receipt of the reply, the assessing officer had to perform the following responsibilities: (i) consider the reply of the assessee under section 149A(c); (ii) take a de…

Waves Tradeline Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1230/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 68

…either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.” 6. The assessee has also raised an additional ground which is as under: - In view of decision of Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46, reopening notice issued on 30.08.2022 was time barred and, thus, original notice issued on 07.06.2021 was invalid. 7. Shri Sudhir Mehta, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that the additional legal ground taken by the assessee goes to the root of the matter and, therefore, this issue may be decided first. He submitted that the original notice und…

Waves Tradeline Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1229/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 68

…either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 6. The assessee has also raised an additional ground which is as under: - In view of decision of Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46, reopening notice issued on 30.08.2022 was time barred and, thus, original notice issued on 07.06.2021 was invalid. 7. Shri Sudhir Mehta, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that the additional legal ground taken by the assessee goes to the root of the matter and, therefore, this issue may be decided first. He submitted that the original notice und…

Waves Tradeline Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1228/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 68

…either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.” 6. The assessee has also raised an additional ground which is as under: - In view of decision of Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46, reopening notice issued on 30.08.2022 was time barred and, thus, original notice issued on 07.06.2021 was invalid. 7. Shri Sudhir Mehta, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that the additional legal ground taken by the assessee goes to the root of the matter and, therefore, this issue may be decided first. He submitted that the original notice und…

Raghu Alekh Barli, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 915/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Bikaram Pushpender, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1606/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Prabhakar Reddy Basireddy, Nalgonda vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1592/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 147Section 148

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 18. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) has, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Prabhakar Reddy Basireddy, Nalgonda vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1591/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 147Section 148

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 18. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) has, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Sanzyme Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1487/HYD/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Vijay Kumar Patil, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above observation

ITA 1328/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1328/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Vijay Kumar Patil Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 7(1) Pan:Aqopp2830M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sarang Shah राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: CA Sarang ShahFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 124Section 124(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A(1)

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

Lingamgunta Adilaxmi, Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1317/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…dam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…

The Ookal Farmers Service Cooperative Society Limited, Warangal vs. ITO., Ward-1, Warangal

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

ITA 1145/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…am v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 20. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) had, inter alia, observed that the order passed without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed that if a statute expressly confers a power or imposes a duty on a particular authority, then such power or duty must be exercised or performed by that authority itself. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that any exercise of powe…