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.

How many judgments cite Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal?

713 judgments on BharatTax cite Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46), spanning 2023 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal 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. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46)

Ankita Badal Mittal, Mumbai vs. Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5484/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…n Ramesh Bachulal Mehta v. ITO (2025) 177 taxmann.com 606, (copy handed over separately at the time of hearing) wherein, the High Court has extensively referred to and relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI v. Rajeev Bansal 2024 469 ITR 46 (SC) and specifically highlighted the illustration concerning assessment year 2017- 18. (see paragraph 10 thereto). Mumbai Bench of the ITAT in Rahat Mohammed Riyazuddin Shaikh v. ITO (2025) 175 taxmann.com 149 and ACIT v. Ms.Asha P.Kedia (2025) 174 taxmann.com 99 have taken similar view while dealing with assessment year 2017-18. 7 Ankita Badal M…

Ll Global, Inc, Usa vs. ACIT Circle Intl. Taxation 2(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2206/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

…sideration. It was pleaded by the ld AR that the notice u/s 148 of the Act issued on 29-7-2022 are barred by limitation as it was issued beyond the surviving period as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). The ld AR also submitted that the escapement of income for both the years under consideration is less than Rs 50 lakhs even according to the ld AO while recording the reasons. 4. Admittedly the 1st notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 25-6-2021 has been issued beyond the period of 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Hence as pe…

Ll Global Inc., United States vs. ACIT, Circle International Taxation-2(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2205/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

…sideration. It was pleaded by the ld AR that the notice u/s 148 of the Act issued on 29-7-2022 are barred by limitation as it was issued beyond the surviving period as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). The ld AR also submitted that the escapement of income for both the years under consideration is less than Rs 50 lakhs even according to the ld AO while recording the reasons. 4. Admittedly the 1st notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 25-6-2021 has been issued beyond the period of 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Hence as pe…

Techno Residency Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5742/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi & Ms. Vinita NaraFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 249Section 271(1)(b)Section 69ASection 80P

…on 06/04/2022. Since the said notice has been issued after 01/04/2021, the same is without jurisdiction and has to be withdrawn in light of the concession made by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC). In support the Learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee placed on record the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma vs. Income-tax Officer, International Tax, Ward-1(1)(1), Mumbai [2025] 179 taxmann.com 433 (Bombay)/[2025] 307 Taxman 367 (Bombay)[13-10-2025] along with other…

Shri Dinesh Kumar Sanghai, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-23(3), Mumbai

ITA 6346/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153CSection 69

…of law. The ld. AR submitted that notice under section 148 was issued on 21.04.2021 and thereafter an order under section 148A(d) was issued on 28.07.2022, which according to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [469 ITR 46 (SC)], was to be issued as per the provisions of section 149(1)(b) under New Regime, being issued after 3years 3 months from the end of relevant assessment year and the income escaped assessment was less than Rs.50,00,000/-. 6. Another contention raised by ld. AR that the approval/sanction under section 151 before issuance of the notice u/s 148 wa…

Gurusukh Energy India Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 643/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.643/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 127(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)Section 246(5)Section 250Section 282ASection 282A(1)Section 69C

…order suffers from lack of jurisdiction as enshrined in the statute then all subsequent proceedings becomes non-est in the eyes of law. I find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its recent 8. order passed in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 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. Elaborating further, the Hon’ble Apex Court had observed that any exe…

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 387/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

…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…

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 386/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

…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…

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 385/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

…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…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Doddi Roopa, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 413/VIZ/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.413/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa, Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Atfpr7237N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…nd CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.)" (emphasis supplied by us) 21. 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 17 DCIT vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa 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…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Warangal

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. PAN: AAOPT4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / ORDER PER. RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appe…

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 491/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Padamchand KhinchaFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…mitation for passing the assessment order was extended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. We further note that even the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Ashish Agarwal [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC) and Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) has considered the extension of limitation only to the extent of TOLA Notification. We further note that an identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Aveva Solutions India LLP, Hyderabad vs., ITO, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad in 21 ITA.Nos.490 & 491/Hyd./2022 ITA.No.1170/Hyd./2024 vide Order dated 19.11.2025 in Paras-7 to 14…

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 490/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Padamchand KhinchaFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…mitation for passing the assessment order was extended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. We further note that even the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Ashish Agarwal [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC) and Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) has considered the extension of limitation only to the extent of TOLA Notification. We further note that an identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Aveva Solutions India LLP, Hyderabad vs., ITO, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad in 21 ITA.Nos.490 & 491/Hyd./2022 ITA.No.1170/Hyd./2024 vide Order dated 19.11.2025 in Paras-7 to 14…

Anand Swaroop, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 60(6), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3306/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

Section 148

…n 14.07.2022. The bone of contention is whether the subsequent notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 14.07.2022 is to be treated as time barred or not in the light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 14.07.2021 has been issued after the ‘surviving period’ as explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal 167 taxmann.com 70. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that fresh notice u/s 148 of the Act could have been…

Umar Daraj, Meerut vs. ITO Ward-1(2)(4), Meerut

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

ITA 3095/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Umar Daraj, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2)(4), 153/1, Hapur Road, Meerut. Umar Nagar, Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Ainpd8766H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CITDR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 40A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘C’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Umar Daraj, vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(4), 153/1, Hapur Road, Meerut. Umar Nagar, Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AINPD8766H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CITDR Date of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appe…

Motiwala Auto Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Auranabad, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 486/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

…ed to follow the directions as provided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of UOI v. Ashish Agrawal-[(2022) 138 taxmann.com 64 (SC)] 1.3 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of UOI v. Rajeev Bansal [(2024) 469 ITR 46] while passing the order. 1.4 On the facts and in circumstances of the case, it is humbly submitted that the notice u/s 148 dated 25.07.2022 is barred by limitation. 1.5 In the above circumstances, facts and in law, the Appellants submits that this case is not fit for initiation of the reassessment proceedings. Therefore, notice issued u/s 148 and…

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Delhi

In the result ITA No.4420/Del/2025 is allowed

ITA 4421/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम Shri Rajesh Batra, Income Tax Officer, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), Pan No.Aahpb4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 01Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…ITA Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRISANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम SHRI RAJESH BATRA, INCOME TAX OFFICER, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), PAN No.AAHPB4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 09.12.2025 09.12.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R…

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Delhi

In the result ITA No.4420/Del/2025 is allowed

ITA 4420/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम Shri Rajesh Batra, Income Tax Officer, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), Pan No.Aahpb4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 01Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…ITA Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRISANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम SHRI RAJESH BATRA, INCOME TAX OFFICER, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), PAN No.AAHPB4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 09.12.2025 09.12.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R…

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Delhi

In the result ITA No.4420/Del/2025 is allowed

ITA 4419/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम Shri Rajesh Batra, Income Tax Officer, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), Pan No.Aahpb4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 01Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…ITA Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRISANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम SHRI RAJESH BATRA, INCOME TAX OFFICER, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), PAN No.AAHPB4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 09.12.2025 09.12.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R…

DCIT Circle 43(1), New Delhi vs. Charu Goel, Delhi

In the result,the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 4863/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4863/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Charu Goel, Circle 43(1), 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Co No.16/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4863/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Charu Goel, Dcit, 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, Vs. Circle 43(1), 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F Civic Centre, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…supported the findings given in the impugned order and stated that while the Ld.CIT(A) had relied on the Rajeev Bansal case of the Allahabad High Court, the issue was now settled through the judgment in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] (469 ITR 46) (SC) [03.10.2024]. 3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the documents before us. It deserves to be observed that the Rajeev Bansal judgment by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court travelled up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) and thereafter it is now well settled that a notice u/s 148 being issued on 22.0…

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

What is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal 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. Rajeev Bansal

Ankita Badal Mittal, Mumbai vs. Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

Ll Global, Inc, Usa vs. ACIT Circle Intl. Taxation 2(2)(1), New Delhi

Ll Global Inc., United States vs. ACIT, Circle International Taxation-2(2)(1), New Delhi

Techno Residency Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai

Shri Dinesh Kumar Sanghai, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-23(3), Mumbai

Gurusukh Energy India Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Doddi Roopa, Visakhapatnam

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Warangal

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

Dr. Reddys, Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

Anand Swaroop, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 60(6), Delhi

Umar Daraj, Meerut vs. ITO Ward-1(2)(4), Meerut

Motiwala Auto Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Auranabad, Aurangabad

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Delhi

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 29(1), Delhi

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Delhi

DCIT Circle 43(1), New Delhi vs. Charu Goel, Delhi