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 366,339 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 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

Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag vs. ITO, Ward-3, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 56Section 57Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…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 Nos.390 & 391/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Kamal Bhavan, Shivaji Road, Alibag, Ward – 3, Panvel Dist. Raigad-402201 Vs. PAN : AAAJK0269P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ajinkya Vaishampayan Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-07-2025 Date of 26-08-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश /…

Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Raigad vs. ITO Ward-3, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 56Section 57Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

M/S. Hardev Construction Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.408/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) M/S Hardev Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Circle Ii(I), Kolkata 8/2A, Garcha 2Nd Lane, Ballygunge, S.O. Kolkata, West Bengal-700019 Pan No. Aabch1827J (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dipu Koley, Adl.Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 148 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Plausible & Bonafide. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, Delay Of 148 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. The Only Issue Pressed At The Time Of Hearing By The Ld. Counsel Of The Assessee Is Against The Invalid Approval Accorded For Issuing Notice

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dipu Koley, Adl.CIT-Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…ad been obtained for issuance of notice. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment on the basis of the said notice is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The issue is no more res integra, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC) has held vide para 114(d)k that it is the Pr.CCIT who should grant sanction u/s.151 of the Act since the 4 reopening is after three years. We also note that the said decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court has been followed in series of decisions by the various Tribunal and Hon’ble High Courts. Some of the decisions wherein the decision of the Hon…

Madgul Services Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 348/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mangtinlen Haokip, Sr.DR

Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.348/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Madgul Services Private Ltd, Vs DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata 20, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge, Kolkata-700019 PAN No. :AABCM 7691 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Mangtinlen Haokip, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement :…

Nirmal Kunj Sales Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1889/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deep Agarwal & SubhankarFor Respondent: Shri Dipu Koley, Adl.CIT-Sr.DR

Section 148Section 151

…l to be obtained for issuance of notice, therefore, the reopening of the assessment on the basis of the said notice is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The issue is no more res integra, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC) has held vide para 114(d) that it is the Pr.CCIT who should grant sanction u/s.151 of the Act since the reopening is after three years. We also note that the said decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court has been followed in series of decisions by the various Tribunal and Hon’ble High Courts. Some of the decisions wherein the decision of the Hon’bl…

Sunidhi Securities & Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5938/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Girish Agrawal, Am Sunidhi Securities & Finance The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, 4(2)(1), Mumbai 8Th Floor, Unit-1, Kalpataru Inspire, Room No. 642, Aaykar Bhavan, M. Vs. Opp. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Santacruz K. Road, Mumbai – 400020. (East), Mumbai – 400055 Pan/Gir No. Aadcs1657D (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Shashi Bekal : Shri. Pravin Salunkhe (Sr. Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Grounds Of Appeal: 1. The Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Action Of D.C.I.T. Of Reopening The Assessment Merely Based On Reason To Suspect & Not Reason To Believe & Is Therefore Bad In Law. 2. The Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Action Of D.C.I.T. Treating The Trading In Steel Exchange India Limited Through Recognized Stock Exchange As Bogus Trading Loss. Sunidhi Securities & Finance Limited

For Appellant: Shri. Shashi Bekal

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 250

…ssing Officer (AO) has erred in the issuance of Notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) with an incorrect sanction under section 151 of the Act in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) hence the reassessment is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in the issuance of Notice 148 of the Act in the absence of any live nexus between the assessee and the recorded reasons. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in the issuance of Notice 1…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5538/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 149

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5536/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2013-14] ITA No. 5537/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2014-15] ITA No. 5538/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2015-16] The I.T.O Vs. Shri Pawan Goyal Ward – 10(1) 134-135, Vaishali, New Delhi Pitampura, Delhi PAN: ACIPG 7822 L (Appellant) Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Shri Suraj Gupta, Adv Department By : Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :- The abo…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5537/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5536/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Earthstahl & Alloys Ltd., Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 478/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.478/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Earthstahl & Alloys Limited 5B Mohini Merline, Jayshree Vihar Pandritarai Mandi Gate, Ravigram S.O, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aacce3567F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Birendra Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…by the A.O is not emanating from the statute, hence, the said observation is perverse and infructuous and does not contain legal validity. We find that 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) 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…

Income Tax Officer, Kolkata vs. Shivrashi Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is hereby treated as allowed

ITA 1098/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148(2)Section 253Section 68

…t is seen that the notice u/s 148 was initially issued in this case on 29/06/2021 and it is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v/s Ashish Agarwal [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC) and Union of India v/s Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) and therefore the validity of the notice u/s 148 has to be examined as per the mandate given by these two cases. 6.2 The issue of notices u/s 148 being time barred came up for consideration in a bunch of writ petitions filed before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. Vide its order dated 04/02/2025 in W. P. (c) No. 3908/2023, in the decision popula…

ITO, Ward 47(1), Delhi vs. Pure Agri World, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 5379/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 5379/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Ito, Pure Agri World, 2618/19, 2Nd Floor, Ward 47(1), Vs. Delhi. Maruti Bhawan, Naya Bazar, Delhi. Pan No.Aaofp2516N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No.54/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 5379/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Pure Agri World, Ito, 2618/19, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Ward 47(1), Maruti Bhawan, Delhi. Naya Bazar, Delhi. Pan No.Aaofp2516N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 151A

…the learned counsel appearing for the revenue. 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 in Union 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…

Aamya Resources LLP, Andheri East vs. ITO, Ward 24(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 4423/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kantvs. Ito, Ward 24(1)(1) Aamya Resources Llp Piramal Chamber, 1, Wilson House, Old Mumbai – 400012. Nagardas Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400069. Pan/Gir No. Abcfa4651A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satish Aggarwal (Virtually Appear) Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 11.10.2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre / Cit(A), Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. Although, Assessee Had Raised Number Of Grounds In The Present Appeal But At The Outset Ld. Ar Pressed Ground No.4 Which Is Legal In Question & It Goes To The Roots Of The Case. Therefore, We Have Decided To Adjudicate This Ground Firstly, Ground No. 4, Which Is Reproduced Herein Below:

Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250Section 3(1)

…ommissioner or Director General, if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year..." 12. Reference is invited to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Rajiv Bansal 301 Taxman 238 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46(SC) [03-10-2024] wherein in concluding para 114 of its judgment, the Supreme Court has held that- 114. In view of the above discussion, we conclude that: a. After I April 2021, the Income Tax Act has to be read along with the substituted provisions; b. TOLA will continue to apply to the Income Tax Act after 1 April 2021 if any action or proceed…

Tuffwud India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 571/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT (DR)

Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

…of the Act expired on 31/03/2022 thus is beyond the period of limitation and provisions of TOLA are not applicable. Ld. AR further submits that during the course of hearing in the case of Union of India v. Rajiv Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 (SC)/Civil Appeal No.8629 of 2024, the Learned Additional Solicitor General of India, Mr. N. Venkataraman has made a statement at a Bar that the Revenue will drop all the notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 related to Assessment Year 201516. It is, thus, prayed by the Ld. AR that the notices issued in the instant case for Asst. Year 2015-16…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-20(3), Delhi, New Delhi vs. Rmp Holdings Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1002/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Ito, Vs. Rmp Holdings Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 138-C, Block -B Group -4 Dilshad Garden New Delhi Pan No.Aaacr5533N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 ITO, Vs. RMP Holdings Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 138-C, Block -B Group -4 Dilshad Garden New Delhi PAN No.AAACR5533N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. Suresh K. Gupta, CA Date of hearing: 11/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 20/08/2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Ap…

DCIT, CC- 13, Jhandewalan vs. Paragon Industries Limited, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5093/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5093/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2017-18] The Dy. C.I.T. Vs. Paragon Industries Limited Central Circle – 13 Zakir Colony, Hapur Road New Delhi Opposite L Block, Shastri Nagar Meerut PAN: AAACP 3060 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv Shri Tarun Chanana, Adv Department By : Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 20.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :- This appeal by the Re…

Sabka Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-22(1), Delhi

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

ITA 5758/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan Jha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…relevant material on record. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Steel and Power Ltd [supra], referring to para 19(f) of the Page 3 of 6 ITA No. 5758/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2015-16] Sabka Buildwell Vs. ITO decision of UOI v Rajeev Bansal 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693(2024), has held as under: “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 Provisions) Act, 2020.” 5. A…

Raj International Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6286/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal Adv. & Ms. Neha

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 6285/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 6286/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Raj International Ltd., Deputy Commissioner of Income A-1803, Samarpan, Kanakia Spaces, Tax - Circle-4(3)(1), Western Express Highway, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Kandivali East, Maharashtra-400101. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACR5092G Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Shri K. Gopal Adv. & Ms. Neha Paranjape, Adv. : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR Revenue / Respondent by Date of Hearing : 10.…

Raj International Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6285/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal Adv. & Ms. Neha

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

ITO, Ward-2(3)(2), Surat vs. Kishor Bhanubhai Asodaria, Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1245/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

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

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 147Section 68Section 69

…herewith). 1. Notice issued u/s 148 as well as consequential reassessment order passed u/s 147, for A.Y. 2015-16, are bad in law on account of being time barred, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Rajeev Bansal - (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) and the Hon'ble jurisdictional Gujarat High Court in the case of Mayurkumar Babubhai Patel v. ACIT-SCA No. 18099 of 2022. 6.1. Ld Counsel submitted that for the Asst. Year 2015-16 it is held that the notice u/s 148 was issued on 29-07-2022 which is beyond the limitation period prescribed u/s. 149 of the Act and therefore the reassessment is h…