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 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 366,416 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 148 Section 147 Section 148A Section 151 Section 149 Section 144B Section 250 Section 144

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

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

Judgments citing Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

Kalpeshkumar Jerambhai Sangani, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed on jurisdictional grounds

ITA 348/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalkalpeshkumar Jerambhai Sangani, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot No. 3, Sr. No. 69, Kathwada, Ward 5(3)(1), Khodiyarnagar Society, Gidc, Ahmedabad Bhagwati Nagar, Nava Nikol, Ahmedabad-382430 [Pan :Eucps 8256 N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Biren Shah & Shri Gulab Thakor, Ars Respondent By: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22 .09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah & Shri Gulab Thakor, ARsFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR

Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Kalpeshkumar Jerambhai Sangani, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot No. 3, Sr. No. 69, Kathwada, Ward 5(3)(1), Khodiyarnagar Society, GIDC, Ahmedabad Bhagwati Nagar, Nava Nikol, Ahmedabad-382430 [PAN :EUCPS 8256 N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah & Shri Gulab Thakor, ARs Respondent by: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR Date of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22 .09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed b…

Seema Goel, Delhi vs. CIT A, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

…ngs initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) pursuant to the notice issued under section 148 dated 28.07.2022 for AY 2015-16 is liable to be set aside in view of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 469 ITR 46 (2024) 3 IT Nos.2005 & 2006/Del/2025 Seema Goel vs. CIT(A) dated 03.10.2024 and applied by Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of Makemytrip India Private Limited versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(1) Delhi & ANR. W.P. (C) 2557/2023 dated 24.03.2025. 10. On the facts and circumstances the learned CITIA) has erred in confirming…

Seema Goel, Delhi vs. CIT A, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

Sanchit Kantilal Ganore, Bhagur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1767/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1767/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanchit Kantilal Ganore, V The Income Tax Officer, 21, Main Road, Bhagur, S. Ward-1(1), Nashik. Nashik - 422502. Pan: Aprpg4907J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar– Add.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is 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 A.Y.2017-18, Dated 29.05.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Dated 21.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law & Without Prejudice To Other Grounds, Ld. Nfac Has Erred In Passing A

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…valid and proper sanction by the prescribed authority under section 151 of the Act as sanction is accorded by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1, Nashik whereas since three years were elapsed as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal - 469 ITR 46, the sanction ought have been obtained from Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, which admittedly not obtained and hence, the said notice as well as consequential assessment order deserves to be quashed ITA No.1767/PUN/2025 [A] 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to other grounds the asses…

Santosh Rani Legal Heir of Late Sh Parveen Kalyan, Kurukshetra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Karnal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4770/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Santosh Rani Vs Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Parveen Ward-1, Karnal, Kalyan, Krishna Nagar, Gamri, Haryana-132001. Thanesar, Distt.-Kurukshetra, Haryana-136118. Pan-Awhpr4944D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…er of Income Tax-7 Versus Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd 465 ITR 356 (Del);  CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd. [2015] 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) dated 08.07.2015;  Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors. -79 ITR 603 (SC) approved in UOI vs Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46 (SC);  Synfonia Tradelinks P Ltd vs ITO (supra) (Del);  Sanjay Kumar Versus ACIT & Anr 458 ITR 548 (Del).” 4. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that both the orders of lower authorities are ex-parte and assessee has not challenged the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings as taken in additional grounds before ld…

Arun Duggal, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 1, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3075/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2009-10] Arun Duggal, Vs Dcit, 3E-42, Nit, Faridabad, Central Circle-1, Haryana-121001. Faridabad. Pan-Agupd5708Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.02.2018 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Gurgaon [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No.617/Cit(A)-3/Ggn/2016-17 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 23.12.2016 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Heard By The Co-Ordinate “E” Bench Of The Tribunal & Was Decided In Terms Of Order Dated 01.04.2022 Wherein Co-Ordinate Bench Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. Thereafter, Assessee Filed Miscellaneous Application (M.A.) Bearing No.100/Del/2022 U/S 254(2) Of The Act. The Co-Ordinate Bench Vide Its Order Dated 09.04.2025 Has Decided The M.A. Filed By Assessee Wherein Order Of Co-Ordinate Bench Dated 04.01.2022 Is Recalled For The Limited Purposes Of Adjudication Of Three Grounds Of Appeal Taken In The Original Form 36. These Grounds Of Appeal Are Bearing Nos.1.2, 1.8 & 5. The Relevant Observations Of The Co-Ordinate Bench In Para 16 Of The Order Of Ma Are As Under:-

Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 254(2)Section 68

…t applying his mind, wherein Ld. Pr. CIT observed that “I am satisfied”. According to Ld.AR, this approval is mechanical and without application of mind and ritualistic. He placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46 (SC) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 73 of the order has make a reference with regard to the sanction for re-opening. Besides this, he placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of SBC Minerals Pvt.Ltd. vs ACIT 475 ITR 360 (Delhi) and other judgements which are extracted here under for ready-reference:-…

Sanjay Kumar Bhutra, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(2), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 261/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2013-14 Sanjay Kumar Bhutra………...……………………….……….……….……Appellant Geeta Katra, 1, Mullick St., 1St Floor, Burrabazar, Kol- 7.. [Pan: Ahspb7216J] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Pransukha, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.12.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sanjay Kumar Bhutra………...……………………….……….……….……Appellant Geeta Katra, 1, Mullick St., 1st Floor, Burrabazar, Kol- 7.. [PAN: AHSPB7216J] vs. ITO, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri S. K. Pransukha, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 04, 2025 Date of…

Jignesh Mahesh Gohel, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 41(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2708/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrijignesh Mahesh Gohel Dcit, Circle 41(2)(1), Shop No.4, Surya Prakash Vs. Mumbai Building, Ganesh Gavde Road, Room No. 831, Kautilya Mulund (W), Mumbai 400080 Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aarpg3795P (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri. Aditya Ramchandran /Revenue By: Shri Vivek Perampurna Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M]: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Pr. C.I.T., Mumbai -41 (Hereinafter Referred To As "Pcit"] Dated 26.03.2025 Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Aditya RamchandranFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 47

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jignesh Mahesh Gohel DCIT, Circle 41(2)(1), Shop No.4, Surya Prakash Vs. Mumbai Building, Ganesh Gavde Road, Room No. 831, Kautilya Mulund (W), Mumbai 400080 Bhavan, BKC, Mumbai 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AARPG3795P (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri. Aditya Ramchandran /Revenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR Date of Hearing 14.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M]: This appeal is filed…

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel 23(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1999/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhri & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4Th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1St Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Abxpl4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue By: Shri Vivek Perampurna Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M]: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 24.01.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2014-15 & 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1st Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: ABXPL4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR Date of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.…

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 23(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1998/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

Deputy CIT, Central Circle-6, Income Tax Department vs. Santosh Hospitals Private Limited, No

ITA 1534/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40Section 68

…s shared with assessee on e-proceedings on 01.04.2021 which the assessee viewed on 08.04.2021 the notice was validly issued on 08.04.2021 and the AO should have followed the procedure laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. Rajiv Bansal (469 ITR 46) and should have validated the notice by virtue of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. Ashish Agarwal (supra). Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that since the AO issued notice after 01.04.2021 and since the said notice was not validated by virtue of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the ca…

Gulamahemad Hamidulla Khan, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(3), Pune

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

ITA 165/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath Murkunde

Section 139Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.165/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Gulamahemad Hamidulla Khan, Income Tax Officer, Ganesh Nagar, Phursungi, Ward-14(3), Pune Tal.-Haveli, Pune-412308 Vs. PAN : AMBPK7001L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S Shingte Department by : Shri Ramnath Murkunde Date of hearing : 02-07-2025 Date of 11-09-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appea…

Nanjundaiah Chandraiah, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the filed by is allowed in above terms”

ITA 966/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2015-16 Nanjundaiah Chandraiah, Vs. Ito, No.343-D 17Th Cross Road ,Ideal Homes Ward – 3(3)(1), Township Rajarajeshwarinagar Bangalore. Bangalore 560098 ,Karnataka India Pan : Acypc 8455 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sakshi Deshpande & Shri. V. Srinivasan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian B, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Sakshi Deshpande and Shri. V. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian B, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 3(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 Nanjundaiah Chandraiah, Vs. ITO, No.343-D 17th Cross Road ,Ideal Homes Ward – 3(3)(1), Township Rajarajeshwarinagar Bangalore. Bangalore 560098 ,Karnataka India PAN : ACYPC 8455 B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Sakshi Deshpande and Shri. V. Srinivasan, CA Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian B, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 03.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Haresh Kumar Manjibhai Patel, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue fails and is dismissed in its entirety

ITA 3633/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 10(38)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…the Act as well as the binding ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish 6 ITA No.3633/Mum/2024 & CO No.147/Mum/2025 Hareshkumar Manjibhai Patel Agrawal (138 taxmann.com 64) and again reiterated in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC). 7. Be that as it may, during the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued a further show- cause notice dated 15/03/2023 reiterating the same points and enclosing the statement of Shri Dipan Patel. The assessee requested cross-examination of the said individual; however, despite issuance of summons for virtual appearan…

Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur vs. Christi Jain, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 465/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Raipur10 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.465/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Christi Jain C-67, August Kranti Marg, Neeti Bagh, New Delhi-110049 Pan: Abopv3621R ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 124(3)Section 127Section 144Section 148

…f the A.O i.e. ITO-3(2), Raipur in framing assessment right from the very beginning when the assessment proceedings were initiated. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its recent order passed in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) 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 exercise of power by statutor…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Prem Chand Pravesh Kumar, Delhi

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 736/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Vs. Prem Chand Pravesh New Delhi Kumar, (Through Erstwhile Partner Sanchit Garg), 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, Delhi- 110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfp9925A Co No. 120/Del/2025 (In Ita No. 736/Del/2025) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Prem Chand Pravesh Vs. Acit, Kumar, (Through New Delhi Erstwhile Partner Sanchit Garg), 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, Delhi- 110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfp9925A Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv Shri Pawan Garg, Ca Ms. Ishika Dua, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151

…earned AO under section 147 of the Act. The Learned AR before us argued that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act is barred by limitation in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). In support of this proposition, the Learned AR placed on record the table containing the list of dates and events as under:- A. Key Facts S. Particulars Date Relevant Pg. No. No. of Paperbook Notice issued u/s 148 (unamended 30.06.2021 Page 19 1. provisions prior to Finance Act, 2021) 2. Letter communicating information 26.05.2022 Page 42-4…

Narasimha Rao Jammigumpula, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasaraopet

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 331/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151ASection 69A

…5] 174 taxmann.com 144 (SC) held as follows: - “4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with his usual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a three judge bench decision of this Court inUnion of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus:- “19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015- 2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Prov…

Sainik Co Operative House Building Society Limited, Jammu and Kashmir vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jammu

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed on the legal issue as indicated above

ITA 698/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 698/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 698/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sainik Co-operative House Vs. ITO, Ward-1,(1), Building Society Ltd. Jammu. [PAN:-AACAS9463J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rohit Kapoor, CA & Sh. V.S. Aggarwal, ITP, Respondent by Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 10.07.025 Date of Pronouncement 08.09.2025 ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by assessee against order of Ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, passed…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad., Vejalpur vs. Pel Industries Limited, Ashram Road

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2216/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Income Tax Officer, Pel Industries Limited, Ward – 3(1)(1), 1/3, Himalaya Park, Room No.524, 5th Floor, Nr. RBI, Aayakar Bhavan, Ashram Road, 100 Feet Anandnagar Ahmedabad – 380 009. Road, [PAN – AAECP 2220 N] Vs. Near Sachin Tower, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad – 380 015. (Gujarat). (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hardik Vora, AR Revenue by Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 14.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.09.2025 O R…

Gunomal Santumal Rochlani, Ulhasnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1) Kalyan, Kalyan

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 4300/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms. Padmavathy Sgunomal Santumal Rochlani, Income Tax Officer, 48, Roshan Apartment, Netaji Road, Ward- 2(1)), Ullhasnagar, Vs. Kalyan-Dombivali-421301 Thane - 421004 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Ahppr 0832B Appellant By : Shri Mohit S. Makhija, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Arun Kanti Datta, Cit- Dr (Appellant) (Respondent) Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Mohit S. Makhija, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 3(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Gunomal Santumal Rochlani, Income Tax Officer, 48, Roshan Apartment, Netaji Road, Ward- 2(1)), Ullhasnagar, Vs. Kalyan-Dombivali-421301 Thane - 421004 (Appellant) : (Respondent) PAN NO. AHPPR 0832B Appellant by : Shri Mohit S. Makhija, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT- DR (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of Hearing : 26.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Vice President: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 30.0…