2025 (6) TMI 2059

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing to AY 2015-16. 2. The grievance of the revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4 Crores on account of share premium money added by the AO u/s 68 of the Act and in the cross objection the assessee had claimed that the jurisdictional conditions of Section 147 to 151 of the Act have not been fulfilled, therefore, the reopening of the assessment is bad in law. 3. Since the issues raised in the cross objection go to the root of the matter, we adjudicate it first. 4. The notice dated 31/07/2022 issued u/s 148 of the Act, reads as under:- 5. The entire quarrel revolves around the aforementioned notice. 6. At the outset, we find that this issue has been settled in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....down under the new regime; e. The Finance Act 2021 substituted the old regime for re-assessment with a new regime. The first proviso to Section 149 does not expressly bar the application of TOLA. Section 3 of TOLA applies to the entire Income Tax Act including Sections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all the notices issued between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021 pertaining to assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 will be within the period of limitation as explained in the tabulation below: Assessment Year (1) Within 3 Years (2) Expiry of Limitation read Within six Years (4) Expiry of Limitation read with TOLA for (4) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng all the notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 for A.Y. 2015-16 as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA. 7. Again the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Steel and Power Limited vs. CBDT in Civil Appeal Nos. 5177 of 2025, 5178 of 2025 & 5179 of 2025, had the occasion to consider an identical grievance and held as under:- "The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with his usual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a three judge bench decision of this Court in Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus: - "19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015- 2016....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reference the aforesaid order reads as under: "Delay condoned. Having regard to the concession made by the petitioner-Department in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024 on 03.10.2024 (2024 SCC ONLINE 754), this Special Leave Petition would not survive for further consideration. Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed. Pending applications), if any, shall stand disposed of." 4. Consequently, following the aforesaid order, this Special Leave Petition is dismissed as it does not survive for further consideration. 5. In this regard, reference could also be made to paragraph 19(e) and (f) in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, Civil App....