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 366,005 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

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudur vs. Sireesha Pochareddy, Chinthavaram

In the result, appeal of the Revenue ITA

ITA 1270/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Income Tax PractitionerFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr AR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 275(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.1270/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 AND Cross Objection No.2/Hyd/2025 Arising out of ITA.No.1270/Hyd/2024 - Assessment Year 2017-2018 Sireesha Pochareddy, The Income Tax Officer, Chinthavaram (PO) vs. GUDUR – 524 101. Nellore Dist. PIN 524 412 PAN APXPP6535M Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh (Respondent/Cross Objector in C.O) (Appellant/Respondent in C.O) For Revenue : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr AR Shri M.A. Rahim, For Assessee : Income Tax Practitioner Date of He…

Raziulla Syed, Hyderabad vs. ITO (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 986/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 195

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.986/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Raziulla Syed, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad - 500 082. vs. (Int. TAXN.)-2, PAN BOTPS1888C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : CA P Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 17.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G, A.M. : This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the final assessment order of the learned ITO- (Intl.Taxn.)-2, Hy…

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 672/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

…y is Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. not possible for an approving authority like ld. Addl. CIT to grant judicious approval u/s 153D of the Act for 200 cases on a single day. 10.13 Recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 : 2024 SCC On Line SC 2693,elucidated the importance of prior approval. Although the said judgment is with reference to granting of Sanction u/s 151 prior to issuance of notice u/s 148, the ratio decidendi is binding to prior approval u/s 153D also, in as much as in both cases approval is to be taken from a superior authority to ensure that the su…

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 671/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

…y is Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. not possible for an approving authority like ld. Addl. CIT to grant judicious approval u/s 153D of the Act for 200 cases on a single day. 10.13 Recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 : 2024 SCC On Line SC 2693,elucidated the importance of prior approval. Although the said judgment is with reference to granting of Sanction u/s 151 prior to issuance of notice u/s 148, the ratio decidendi is binding to prior approval u/s 153D also, in as much as in both cases approval is to be taken from a superior authority to ensure that the su…

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 670/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

…/2024 Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. not possible for an approving authority like ld. Addl. CIT to grant judicious approval u/s 153D of the Act for 200 cases on a single day. 10.13 Recently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 : 2024 SCC On Line SC 2693, elucidated the importance of prior approval. Although the said judgment is with reference to granting of Sanction u/s 151 prior to issuance of notice u/s 148, the ratio decidendi is binding to prior approval u/s 153D also, in as much as in both cases approval is to be taken from a superior authority to ensure that the s…

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 669/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

…y is Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. not possible for an approving authority like ld. Addl. CIT to grant judicious approval u/s 153D of the Act for 200 cases on a single day. 10.13 Recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 : 2024 SCC On Line SC 2693,elucidated the importance of prior approval. Although the said judgment is with reference to granting of Sanction u/s 151 prior to issuance of notice u/s 148, the ratio decidendi is binding to prior approval u/s 153D also, in as much as in both cases approval is to be taken from a superior authority to ensure that the su…

Shatakshi Mudra Investment Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 26/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2015-16 Shatakshi Mudra Investment Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. Bc 266, 3Rd Floor, Sector-1, Vs Salt Lake City, Bidhannagar, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal-700064. (Pan:Aaecs3930L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Ankeeta Lohia, CA & Sri G. S. Kedia,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shatakshi Mudra Investment ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. BC 266, 3rd floor, Sector-1, Vs Salt Lake City, Bidhannagar, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal-700064. (PAN:AAECS3930L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Ms. Ankeeta Lohia, CA & Sri G. S. Kedia,Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.03.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee a…

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax vs. Sumitra Rajeshbhai Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objection by the assessee is allowed, while the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2459/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151Section 151ASection 250Section 68

…and the issue was decided in favour of the taxpayer, inter alia, by considering the submission of the Revenue before the ITA No. 2459/MUM/2024 & CO No. 286/MUM/2024 (A.Y.: 2015-16) Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, reported in (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC). 11. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative (“learned DR”) filed a written submission dated 06.01.2025, wherein it is submitted in para-4.6.1 that the Revenue’s concession before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) cannot be countenanced as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The learned DR further submi…

Rumina Shamsuddin Wallani, India vs. ITO 19(1)(5), Pirmal Chambers

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5057/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.5057/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rumina Shamsuddin Vs. ITO 19(1)(5) Wallani Lalbaug, Parel, 1503,Caladia, The Mumbai-400012. Botanika, Jayabheri Enclave, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500032. PAN: AAFPW9213Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri. Mayur Makadia Respondent by Ms. Pradnya Gholap SR. D.R. Date of Hearing 10.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 28.02.2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The Present appeal filed by the assessee arises out of order dated 30/07/2024 passed by N…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramchand Thakurdas Jhamtani, Mumbai

ITA 3553/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…ed 24/07/2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act (new regime) were passed/issued within the prescribed time. 8. At this juncture it would be pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03/10/2024]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had made the following observations in relation to the interpret between the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) and TOLA1: “b. Interplay of Ashish Agarwal with TOLA 108.The Income-tax Act read with TOLA extended the time limit for issuing reassessment notices under s…

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramchand Thakurdas Jhamtani, Thane

Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the Revenue in the departmental appeal in relation to the relief granted by the CIT(A) on merits are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous

ITA 3552/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 250

…3552/Mum/2024& C.O. No. 226/Mum/2024 Assessment Year 2015-16 regime) could have been issued after 31/03/2022. 8. At this juncture it would be pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03/10/2024]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had made the following observations in relation to notice issued under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2015- 2016 and in relation to First Proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act (new regime): “44. We now proceed to analyse the issues given the broad legislative and judicial background discu…

ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramchand Thakurdas Jhamtani, Thane

Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the Revenue in the departmental appeal in relation to the relief granted by the CIT(A) on merits are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous

ITA 3551/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

…148A(d) of the Act and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act (new regime) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 6. In this regard we deem it appropriate to refer to judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03/10/2024]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had, while dealing with the issue of approval from specified authority in terms of Section 151 of the Act, made ITA No. 3551/Mum/2024& C.O. No. 228/Mum/2024 Assessment Year 2017-18 the following observations: “74. The above table indicates that the specified authority is directly co-related to the time…

Aptivaa Middle East Fze, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commission of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, Mumbai

In the result of the file by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2791/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 6(3)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 2791/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2357/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & I.T.A. No. 2355/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aptivaa Middle Ease FZE Vs. Deputy C/o Apativaa Consulting Commissioner of Solutions Private Limited, Income-tax, 91, Springboard, 74 Circle 1(1) (2), Techno Park, 74/II, Cross International Rd. C, opp. Gate No. 2, Taxation, Mumbai M.I.D.C., Seepz, Andheri East, Mumbai. PAN: AAWCA5297L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appel…

Aptivaa Middle East Fze, Dubai, United Arab Emirates vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, Mumbai, Maharastra

In the result of the file by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2357/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 6(3)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 2791/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2357/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & I.T.A. No. 2355/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aptivaa Middle Ease FZE Vs. Deputy C/o Apativaa Consulting Commissioner of Solutions Private Limited, Income-tax, 91, Springboard, 74 Circle 1(1) (2), Techno Park, 74/II, Cross International Rd. C, opp. Gate No. 2, Taxation, Mumbai M.I.D.C., Seepz, Andheri East, Mumbai. PAN: AAWCA5297L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appel…

Aptivaa Middle East Fze, Dubai, United Arab Emirates vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, Mumbai, Maharastra

In the result of the file by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2355/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 6(3)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 2791/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2357/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) & I.T.A. No. 2355/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aptivaa Middle Ease FZE Vs. Deputy C/o Apativaa Consulting Commissioner of Solutions Private Limited, Income-tax, 91, Springboard, 74 Circle 1(1) (2), Techno Park, 74/II, Cross International Rd. C, opp. Gate No. 2, Taxation, Mumbai M.I.D.C., Seepz, Andheri East, Mumbai. PAN: AAWCA5297L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appel…

Mohd.Salim Abdul Hakim Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 26(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6848/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal a/w Shri OmFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 6848/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Md. Salim Abdul Hakim Khan, ITO Ward -26(2)(1), B 307, Samrat CHS, LBS Marg, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C-43, Vs. Kurla S.O, Mumbai-400070. G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. PAN: AVRPK7818C Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Shri K. Gopal a/w Shri Om Kandalkar, AR Revenue / Respondent by : Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT : 20.02.2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : 27.02.2025 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: This…

Ra Fashions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Mumbai

ITA 2632/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali ParekhFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…of Income Tax was the Specified Authority for seeking approval for passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act. 8. In this regard we deem it appropriate to refer to judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03/10/2024]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had, while dealing with the issue of sanction from specified authority, made the following observations: “74. The above table indicates that the specified authority is directly co-related to the time when the notice is issued. This plays out as follows under the old regime: (i) If income escaping assessm…

Rachit V Shah vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-7

ITTA/85/2023HC Telangana25 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Abhishek Sanjeev Nadgeri, Navi Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Navi Mumbai

In the result of the file by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 4499/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 115BSection 131Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 4499/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Abhishek Sanjeev Vs. Assessment Unit, Nadgeri Income Tax 703, Aakesha CHSL, Plot Department No. 56/57, Darave Bo, IT- Office, Vashi Nerul Node-III So, Thane, Railway Station Maharashtra-400706 Building, PAN: AWHPN3564D Navi Mumbai-400703 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri. Devendra Jain Respondent by Shri. Asif Karmali, SR. D.R. Date of Hearing 23.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 21.02.2025 ORDER Per:…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sunniva Promoters Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2846/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Gurcharan Singh, C/O- Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv., Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi Pan: Aaipm0604L (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Jatinder Pal Singh, C/O- Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv., Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi Pan: Ablps1306D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm These Twin Assessees, Namely, Sh. Gurcharan Singh & Sh. Jatinder Pal Singh Have Filed As Many Appeals

Section 147Section 148

…sing Officer(s) vide section 148 notices issued on 21st & 20th July, 2022, case-wise respectively. This is for the precise reason that the department already appears to have conceded the very issue of limitation aspect in Union of India Vs Rajiv Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) that the provision of Taxation and Other Laws [Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions] Act, 2020 “TOLA” would not apply for assessment year 2015-16 herein. It further emerges that the very issue between the parties is no more res integra in light of the 2 | P a g e ITA Nos.2846 & 2847/Del/2025 tribunal’s recent learned coordinate be…