Reassessment notice, limitation, and joint property ownership failed to support additions in an income-tax reassessment dispute.

A reassessment notice under section 148A(b) was invalid because only five days were granted for response, contrary to the minimum statutory period of seven days, and the consequent proceedings failed. The section 148 notice for assessment year 2015-16 was also barred by limitation, having been issued after expiry of the applicable outer period. On merits, an addition relating to immovable property could not be sustained where the sale deed showed joint purchase by the assessee and his wife, yet the assessment was made entirely in the assessee's hands without proper allocation of ownership.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was valid when less than seven days were granted for response; (ii) whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2015-16 was barred by limitation; (iii) whether the addition made in respect of the immovable property could be sustained when the property stood purchased jointly by the assessee and his wife.

Issue (i): whether the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was valid when less than seven days were granted for response.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required not less than seven days for furnishing a response to the notice under section 148A(b). The notice in question granted only five days. The attempt to justify the short period on the basis of an alleged request for extension was not accepted because the request was not considered and non-objection before the lower authorities could not validate a notice issued contrary to the statute.

Conclusion: The notice under section 148A(b) was bad in law and the consequential proceedings were not sustainable.

Issue (ii): whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2015-16 was barred by limitation.

Analysis: For assessment year 2015-16, the outer period for issuing notice under the reassessment provisions expired on 31.03.2022. The notice was issued on 04.04.2022, after expiry of the permissible period. The limitation position was treated as settled by the binding legal position relied upon in the order.

Conclusion: The notice under section 148 was barred by limitation.

Issue (iii): whether the addition made in respect of the immovable property could be sustained when the property stood purchased jointly by the assessee and his wife.

Analysis: The sale deed obtained from the registering authority showed joint purchase by the assessee and his wife. The assessment was framed entirely in the hands of the assessee without accounting for the joint ownership position. On that factual basis, the addition treating the entire investment and related difference as the assessee's income could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The addition on merits was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment and the consequential additions failed both on procedural legality and on merits, entitling the assessee to relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment notice issued under section 148A(b) must afford the minimum statutory response period, and a notice under section 148 issued after expiry of the applicable limitation period is invalid; additions based on jointly owned property cannot be sustained in the hands of only one co-owner without proper allocation.

---