Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the relevant assessment year was barred by limitation and liable to be quashed, and whether the consequent reassessment could survive.
Analysis: The additional ground challenging jurisdiction was admitted as it raised a pure question of law capable of being decided on the existing record. The Tribunal held that, for an assessment year beginning on or before 01.04.2021, the validity of a notice under section 148 has to be tested with reference to the limitation that had already expired under the unamended regime. It found that the show-cause notice under section 148A(b) was issued within time, but the notice under section 148 was issued after the expiry of the relevant six-year period. Following the binding jurisdictional precedent, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's reliance on the amended limitation structure to save the notice.
Conclusion: The notice under section 148 was barred by limitation and was quashed. The reassessment order consequently could not survive.
Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on the jurisdictional challenge, and the remaining grounds became infructuous once the reopening was held invalid.
Ratio Decidendi: For an assessment year covered by the old limitation regime, a reassessment notice under section 148 cannot be sustained if, on the date of issuance, the six-year period had already expired; the amended regime does not revive a time-barred notice.