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 366,421 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

Swaminath Baburao Patil, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3) Solapur, Solapur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 832/PUN/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.832/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Swaminath Baburao Patil, V The Income Tax Officer, C37, Siddheshwar Market S Ward-2(3), Solapur. Yard, Hyderabad Road, Solapur – 431005. Maharashtra. Pan: Akwpp4321P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule (Through Virtual Hearing) – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2014-15 Dated 27.01.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act, Dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 153CSection 249(4)(a)Section 250Section 292B

…A No.832/PUN/2025 [A] “1) Legal Ground that reopening is time barred as held by Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal It may please be held that notice issued u/s 148 dated 26/07/2022 is barred by the limitation as held by Hon Supreme Court in case of Rajeev Bansal 340 CTR 865 in para 111 and 112. The notice u/s 148 under old regime was issued on 25/06/2021, so the surviving period with the AO was 6 days (days between 25/06/2021 to 30/06/2021), the assessee has submitted the response to notice u/s 148A(b) on 10/06/2022, so the AO was having 6 days from this date to issue notice u/s 148 under new regime which expired on…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 530/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 527/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 525/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 518/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 514/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 513/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 512/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 511/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(10) Jamnagar, Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

ITA 510/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

…ed such petitions. Page 9 of 24 ITA Nos. 510 Rjt 2025 & 9 Ors. Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Kathiriya 8. The matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC) decided the issues raised with regard to delay as per the provisions of section 149 of the Act which has come into operation after 01.04.2021 as well as validity of sanction granted under section 155 of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Revenue conceded to the effect that so far as Assessment Year 2015-20…

Navinbhai Ratilal Idria, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 694/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(c)

…dustries Ltd. in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 56889/2024 wherein it is held as follows: "4. Mr. Shakdher has placed before us a calculation chart which reads as under:- "Calculation of Limitation period as per Hon'ble SC judgement in the case of Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) (Refer to Para 112 of the order) Particulars As per example given in SC order Facts of RIL Page No of SLP Notice u/s. 148 under old regime 81.05.2021 29. 86. 2021 42-43 No. of days available with AO 61 2 See Note to issue notice under new regime after receiving objection from Assessee (from date of 148 notice till 30.06.2021) Notice u/s, i48A…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Adajan vs. Chandubhai Jadavbhai Korat, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 720/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Ito, Vs. Chandubhai Jadavbhai Korat, Ward – 1(3)(1), 5, Raghuvir Bungalow, City Light Surat Road, Bharthana, B.O. Umra, Surat – 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk7796L (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.36/Srt/2024 (Ay 2015-16) (Arising Out Of Ita No.720/Srt/2024) Chandubhai Jadavbhai Korat, Vs. Ito, 5, Raghuvir Bungalow, City Light Road, Ward – 1(3)(1), Bharthana, B.O. Umra, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk7796L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…21, the said notice was deemed to be notice u/s 148A(b) of the amended provisions in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of UOI vs. Ashish Agarwal, 444 ITR 1 (SC). He submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal, 469 ITR 46 (SC) has recorded the concession of the learned counsel for revenue in respect of notices u/s 148 for AY 2015-16 in para 19(f) of its judgement that for AY 2015-16 that all notices issued u/s 148 of the Act on or after 01.04.2021 will have to be dropped. Considering the above concession, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the subsequent decision in case…

Bhargav Ram Munagapati, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 510/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (HYBRID HEARING) श्री रवीश सूद, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.510/VIZ/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Bhargav Ram Munagapati 33-26-13, Kaasthuribaipet Suryaraopet S.O. Vijayawada (urban) Krishna - 520002 Andhra Pradesh [PAN:AVXPM9166B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) करदाता का प्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented by राजस्व का प्रतिनिधि…

Santosh Kumar Shukla, Lucknow vs. Assessment Unit, NFAC

ITA 400/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Santosh Kumar Shukla V. The Assessment Unit 11A/141, Vrindavan Colony Nfac Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Bawps5372J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shalabh Singh, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.03.2025 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Was An Employee Of Planning Research & Action Division Of State Planning Institute, Since 1993. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice Under Section 148A(B) Of The Act, Vide Dated 16.03.2022 For The Reason That The Assessee Had Made Cash Deposits/Time Deposits In His Bank Account. In Response To Notice Under Section Under Section 148 Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.04.2022, Declaring A Total Income Of

For Appellant: Shri Shalabh Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151ASection 69Section 69A

…rder and the Appeal order passed are specifically impugned since the mandated procedure established by law and the intent, purpose and scope of section 148, 148A read with see149 vide the settled law laid down as per the Apex Court case in Uol v Rajeev Bansal 340 CTR 865 SC and of Union of India v Ashish Agarwal 326 CTR 47 SC has been violated. The relevant provisions of the statute itself proves that the present proceedings are per se beyond the prescribed period envisaged u/s 149 and upheld by CBDT Instruction 1 dated 11 05 2022; and grossly untenable vide sec144B; and is violative of sec. 151A, ITA No.400/LKW…

Iva Narayan, Kolkata, West Bengal vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Malda, West Bengal, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1246/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1246/Kol/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Iva Narayan Vs Ito Ward-3(1), Malda 2B, Vishnu Niwas, 220 Nsc Bose Road, Kolkata West Bengal-700047 Pan No. :Aadcb 5095 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Akash Ojha, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 13/10/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 14.05.2025 Passed For Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Submitted That The Assessment Framed By The Ao U/S.147 R.W.S.144B Of The Act Is Not Sustainable As The Notice Issued U/S.148 Of The Act Is Barred By Limitation. The Ld.Cit(A) Also Without Considering The Same Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. It Was The Submission Of The Ld.Ar That Notice U/S.148 Of The Act Was Issued On The Assessee On 20.07.2022. Ld. Ar Drew My Attention To Notice Issued U/S.148 Of The Act, Copy Of Which Has Been Filed At Page 8 Of The Paper Book. Ld. Ar Further Submitted That The Impugned Assessment Year Is A.Y.2016-2017. It Was The Submission That Notice Issued U/S.148 Of The Act Was Issued As A Consequence Of The Judgment Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ashish Agarwal, Reported In (2022) 444 Itr

For Appellant: Shri Akash Ojha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…2 1(SC). It was the submission that the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) has been clarified in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal, reported in [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC). In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal, referred to supra, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act as barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and in consequence thereof the assessment order so also the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) are liable to be quashed. Ld. AR further drew my attention to…

Hilton Dealmark Private Limited, Kolkata, West Bengal vs. Circle 7(1), Kolkata, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous and Cross Objection

ITA 1002/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 20Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1002/Kol/2025 Assessment Year 2015-16 Hilton Dealmark Private Limited, 123 Cotton Street, Kolkata, West Bengal - 700007 [PAN: AACCH7095R] Appellant vs. Circle 7(1), Kolkata, Aaykar Bhavan, Kolkata - 700007 Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Prakash D Shah, CA Department represented by : Dipu Koley, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 20.11.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 21.11.2025 ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This a…

DCIT CC 2 2, Chennai vs. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1259/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 | The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit Assessee By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…nder Section 153A or Section 153C, as in force at that time. 9. We also consider it apposite to refer to the following observations made by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): ITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 (AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17) M/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd. :: 45 :: "49. The first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) requires the determination of whether the time limit prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime continues to exist for the…

DCIT CC 2 2, Chennai vs. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1257/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit Assessee By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…nder Section 153A or Section 153C, as in force at that time. 9. We also consider it apposite to refer to the following observations made by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): ITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 (AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17) M/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd. :: 45 :: "49. The first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) requires the determination of whether the time limit prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime continues to exist for the…

DCIT CC 2 2, Chennai vs. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1256/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

…of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 preme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): ITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 & ITA Nos. 1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 ITA Nos. 1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 (AYs 2013 s 2013-14 to 2016-17) Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt :: 45 :: "49. The first proviso to Section…

Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1236/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

…of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 preme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman SCC OnLine SC 2693/ [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): 238/469 ITR 46 (SC): ITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 & ITA Nos. 1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 ITA Nos. 1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 (AYs 2013 s 2013-14 to 2016-17) Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt :: 45 :: "49. The first proviso to Section…