TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts, suspicion and assumption. c) That the Id. Commissioner of I.T. (Appeals) has overlooked the relevant factors and material available on record and has relied on factors and material which were either irrelevant or factually incorrect and, hence, the conclusion reached by him is vitiated by errors of facts and law. d) The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made u/s. 69A of the IT Act, towards unexplained money, though restricting the amount to Rs. 24,72,153/-, without appreciating that the said amount was not found recorded in the books of accounts of the appellant. e) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id. Commissioner of I. T. (Appeals) has erred on the ground that the amount of Rs. 24,72,153/- being peak value of investment as on a particular date, 24/05/2012 remains unexplained u/s 69A by overlooking the complete evidences on records in respect of the aforesaid purchases vis-à-vis Global report through broker, Alacrity Securities Ltd. along with the ledger account and bank statements. f) The Id. Commissioner of I.T. (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer at no point of time ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne. b) The Id. Commissioner of I.T. (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the notice issued u/s 148 is time barred u/s 149(1)(a) as the addition of Rs. 24,72,153/- is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, being below the monetary threshold and the same is bad-in-law and needs to be quashed." 3. We, at the outset, noticed that one of the grounds raised by the assessee, i.e. ground no.4(a), pertains to challenging the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act, is a jurisdictional issue which goes to the root of the matter, and therefore, the same is considered at the outset. 4. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record, are: The assessee is an individual and for the year under consideration, filed his return of income on 02/07/2013, declaring a total income of Rs. 2,11,720. Pursuant to the enquiry conducted by the DDIT, Ahmedabad, after search action on Mr. Jignesh Shah and Mr. Sanjay Shah group of companies, it was found that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation entry transactions of bogus long-term capital gains and has traded in the penny scrip and booked fictitious long-term capita....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....both sides and perused the material available on record. In order to decide the issue at hand, it is, at the outset, relevant to note that the provisions of section 149 of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021, which provides the time limit for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, and the same reads as follows: - "Time limit for notice. 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year - (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b); (b) if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax, represented in the form of asset, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year: Provided that no notice under section 148 shall be issued at any time in a case for the relevant assessment year beginning on or before 1st day of April, 2021, if such notice could not have been i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or before 01/04/2021, if such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of section 149(1)(b), as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021. 10. Section 149 of the Act, prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 2021, reads as follows: - "Time limit for notice. 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b) or clause (c); (b) if four years, but not more than six years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to one lakh rupees or more for that year; (c) if four years, but not more than sixteen years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income in relation to any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment. Explanation.- In determining income chargeab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 31/03/2021. Therefore, applying the aforesaid ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the facts of the present case, we are of the considered view that as the period of 6 years from the end of the relevant assessment year expires on 31/03/2020, which fell within the period from 20/03/2020 to 31/03/2021, therefore, the notice issued on 29/06/2021, which was deemed to be noticed under section 148A(b) of the Act, is covered under the extended time limit till 30/06/2021 provided under the TOLA. 12. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraphs 106 and 107 of its decision in Rajeev Bansal (supra), observed as follows: - "106. In Ashish Agarwal (supra), this Court directed the assessing officers to provide relevant information and materials relied upon by the Revenue to the assesses within thirty days from the date of the judgment. A show cause notice is effectively issued in terms of Section 148A(b) only if it is supplied along with the relevant information and material by the assessing officer. Due to the legal fiction, the assessing officers were deemed to have been inhibited from acting in pursuance of the Section 148A(b) notice till the relevant material was suppli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the validity of notices issued from 01/04/2021 to 30/06/2021 under the old regime, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra), analysing the interplay of Ashish Agarwal (supra) with the TOLA, in paragraph 108 of its judgment observed as follows: - "108. The Income Tax Act read with TOLA extended the time limit for issuing reassessment notices under Section 148, which fell for completion from 20 March 2020 to 31 March 2021, till 30 June 2021. All the reassessment notices under challenge in the present appeals were issued from 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021 under the old regime. Ashish Agarwal (supra) deemed these reassessment notices under the old regime as show cause notices under the new regime with effect from the date of issuance of the reassessment notices. The effect of creating the legal fiction is that this Court has to imagine as real all the consequences and incidents that will inevitably flow from the fiction. 163 Therefore, the logical effect of the creation of the legal fiction by Ashish Agarwal (supra) is that the time surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA will be available to the Revenue to complete the remaining proceedings in furtherance....