TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 613
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y limitation as per the directions given by Hon'ble supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Rajeev Bansal [[2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)]. 4. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the order passed by the AO u/s 147 on 23.05.2023 is bad in law since, the jurisdictional notice issued u/s 148 on 25.07.2022 is bad in law. 5. That the CIT(A) has erred in not taking cognizance of the details of receipts and expenditure furnished in the return of income filed in response to notice issued u/s 148 whereby it was made clear that receipts and expenditure are duly supported by balance sheet, Profit & Loss account, etc. 6. That the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the AO u/s 69A without appreciating that the provisions of section 69A can only be invoked in the case of unexplained investment not recorded in the books of account and not on account of cash deposited in bank. 7. That the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the AO without allowing the benefit of returned income. 7.1 That without prejudice to the aforesaid, the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the major cash deposited in the bank account was on account of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in this case not only chose to ignore the date of hearing but even did not furnish any submissions. 3.8 Considering the above discussion and facts, it is clear that the appellant assessee is not pursuing its case on merits. In pursuance of its appeal the appellant assessee did not file any documents in support of its claim that why addition of Rs. 70,10,627/- is not sustainable. The appeal cannot be decided merely on the basis of grounds of appeals and statement of facts as no corroborative evidence of any kind has been submitted by the appellant assessee. Based on these observations the appeal filed by the appellant assessee is dismissed and the order of the AO is confirmed. In result the appeal is hereby dismissed." 5. Now the assessee is in appeal before the tribunal on the ground contained in the memorandum of appeal. In course of appellate proceedings, the assessee has filed a short paper book containing the notice u/s 148 dated 7th June, 2021 (as per regime existing prior to 31st March, 2021), notice u/s 148A(b) dated 20.05.2022, copy of order u/s 148A(d) dated 25.07.2022 along with fresh notice issued u/s 148 dated 25.07.2022. 6. The legal issues agitated in grounds 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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. East End Dwellings Co. Ltd. v. Finsbury Borough Council[1952] AC 109. [Lord Asquith, in his concurring opinion, observed: "If you are bidden to treat an imaginary state of affairs as real, you must surely, unless prohibited from doing so, also imagine as real the consequences and incidents which, if the putative state of affairs had in fact existed, must inevitably have flowed from or accompanied it."] 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 of tile deemed notices, including issuance of reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. The surviving or balance time limit can be calculated by computing the number of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filing response vide above notice 02.06.2022 ( 2nd June, 2022 ) Surviving period being 24 days, notice u/s 148 ( under new regime ) time barring date is 26th June, 2022. Notice u/s 148 ( under new regime ) actually issued on 25th July, 2022 ( is barred by limitation ). 7.1 Thereafter, he pointed out to the copy of the notice issued u/s 148 dated 25.07.2022 (placed in paper book page no. 6 and 7) to argue that the said notice is beyond the said period of limitation which makes the notice invalid and bad in law. 7.2 In support of his contention he relied on various judgments of various courts some of which are as follows: [2025] 175 taxmann.com 256 (Delhi)HIGH COURT OF DELHI Samajwadi Party v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Exemption : Section 148, read with section 149, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for (Period of limitation) - Assessment year 2014-15 - Assessee filed instant petition impugning reassessment notice issued under section 148 on 31-8-2022pursuant to original notice dated 28-06-2021 (issued under old law) which was deemed to be notice under section _148A(b) in view of Supreme Court ruling in Union of India v. As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4(d), thus, an order under section 148A(d) was required to be passed within said twenty-nine days notwithstanding time stipulated under section 148A(d) - Held, yes - Whether since assessee had furnished its response to notice under section 148A(b) on 13-6-2022, time available to Assessing Officer to pass an order under section 148A(d) was necessarily truncated and same was required to be passed on or before 12-7-2022 - Held, yes - Whether thus, impugned notice dated 30-7-2022 had been issued beyond period of limitation and was to be set aside - Held, yes [Paras 69, 71 and 72] [In favour of assessee] 2025 (6) TMI 1484 - ITAT DELHI HARISH KUMAR VERSUS NFAC, DELHI AND ACIT, NEW DELHI VERSUS HARISH KUMAR Validity of reopening of assessment - period of limitation - Scope of TOLA - Period of limitation under new tax regime - Notice issued old law - HELD THAT:- We note that in the instant case, surviving period i.e. number of days between date of issuance of original notice u/s 148 under old law and 30.06.2021, is only 7 days. Upon considering the period of exclusion prescribed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024 (10) TMI 264 - SUPREME COURT (LB)] i.e.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as in the facts of the case the notice under Section 148 is issued on 21.7.2022 and as such the notice dated 30.6.2021 would be an invalid notice. In the result, the petition succeeds only on this ground. 2025 (6) TMI 1309 - ITAT MUMBAIMRS. NAYNA ASHOK SHAH VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER-20 (2) (1), MUMBAI : Validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the new regime being beyond the period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, notice under old provision of the Section 148 was issued to the assessee on 20/06/2022. As per the table in the decision Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI vs. Ashish Agarwal [2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT] 3 years expired on 31/03/2021. By virtue of ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI vs. Ashish Agarwal [2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT] notices issued between 01/04/2021 and 30/06/2021 was deemed to be issued as on 31/03/2021 and thus extended period to complete the procedure as per the new provisions of Section 148A was available only till 30/06/2021 for A.Y.2017-18. Thus in the present facts of the case, the revenue only had 20 days to complete the entire procedure u/s. 149(1) of the new regime and to issue notice u/s. 148 in the new re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in favour of assessee. 2025 (5) TMI 722 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT Other Citation: 2025:BHC - GOA:868 - DB GURPREET SINGH VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX) Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - period of limitation - notices issued u/s 148 of the old regime - HELD THAT:- A notice under Section 148 of the IT Act accompanied by an order under Section 148A (d) is required to be issued within the time stipulated under Section 149 of the IT Act. Section 148A (d) does not govern the computation of time as contemplated in terms of Section 149 of the IT Act. The entire process under Section 148A(a) to (d) and the issuance of notice under Section 148 has to be completed within the total time available in terms of Section 149 (1) of the IT Act for issuance of notice under Section 148. A notice issued under Section 148 of the IT Act which is beyond the time line stipulated under Section 149 (1) is non-complaint and invalid. The timeline under Section 148A (d) is for the Assessing Officer to comply with the stipulations and the streamlining contemplated under Section 148A. This is primarily to bring in transparency and accountability into the system and is intended for the benefit of the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd since the notice itself is void ab initio the entire proceedings are to be cancelled. Before concluding the ld AR however, has withdrawn his grounds of appeal No. 1, 5 and 6 ( contained in form 36 ) which are on merits, and has rested his arguments only on the legal aspect of the matter. 9. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and has also filed written submissions which are reproduced as below: "(1) Not raised before the authorities below and require investigation of facts and not going to the root of the matter is not justified. (2) Original Notice u/s 148 (page 1 of paper book of assessee) is issued on 7-6-2021 and is valid as per CBDT instruction no 1/2022 dated 11 -5-2022 and as concluded in para 6.1 and 6.2 of instruction in view of the SC judgment in Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal, has issued instructions that time extension provided by TOLA, with notification no 38 dated 27-4-2021 of Central govt extending time to issue notices upto 30-6-2021. (upto 30-6-2021) will allow extended reassessment notice to travel back in time to their original date when such notices were to be issued (ie 31-3-2021) and then new section 149 of the act is to be applied. (par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l representatives. In view of the above the Ld DR prayed that order of the Assessing officer be restored or matter restored back to the file of AO to take appropriate action and to frame assessment in accordance with law." 10. We have considered the materials on record and the rival submissions and we find that; in compliance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra), the Assessing Officer provided information and material to the Assessee on 20.05.2022. The Assessee was granted two weeks' time to respond to the said notice i.e. by 02.06.2022. 10.1 According to section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Period of six years from the end of relevant assessment year i.e. from 2013-14, got expired on 31.03.2020 and further time period was extended by the Taxation and Other Law Act, 2020 (TOLA) till 30.06.2021. 10.2 The next round of litigation arose before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and in the landmark judgment of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal dated 03.10.2024 reported in [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) (please refer page 1-42 of the Case Law PB), it was held that notices issued under the erstwhile Section 148 for Assessment Years 2013....