AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edures under law not having been followed and the requisite approvals from the specified authority not having been taken, reopening of assessment in the appellant's case is bad in law. Consequently, the reassessment order as passed/confirmed being also bad in law is required to be quashed. 3. In any case, and without prejudice, the authorities below have erred in not appreciating the fact that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act, was barred by limitation and therefore all the consequential proceedings including the impugned assessment order become void ab initio and such order is liable to be quashed. 4. In any case and without prejudice, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the the impugned assessment order which was passed not in accordance with law and especially in accordance with Section 144B of I.T. Act, 1961. The impugned order as made/confirmed being bad in law and is liable to be quashed. 5.1 Without prejudice, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 4,35,600/- being 10% of the total cash receipts of Rs. 43,56,000/- received from contractors as commission income in the han....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as unexplained money u/s.69A made on account of repayment of loan in cash to be deleted, levy of taxes at special rates be deleted and interest as levied be also deleted. 2. Assessee has filed addition ground which is as under: 1. In any case and without prejudice, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 28.06.2023 issued in the old format and not in accordance with the revised format as prescribed by the Board Instruction dated 23.06.2017, is invalid and therefore the assessment framed pursuant thereto is void ab initio and such assessment is liable to be quashed. 3. At the outset of hearing, learned Counsel submitted that notice issued by the AO under section 148 of the Act dated 29.04.2022 for both the AYs are barred by limitation as per judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UoI v. Rajeev Bansal [Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024, vide its order dated 03-10-2024]. Therefore, the reassessment Order passed by the AO for the impugned Assessment Year is null and void. 4. On the other hand, learned DR relied on the Order of lower authorities and submitted that assessee had income which had escaped income in the eyes of law and huge cash was deposite....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;ble Supreme Court that all the notices issued for Asst. Year 2015-16 on or after 1st April 2021 will be dropped, however, in the instant case, no such action was taken and re-assessment order was framed in the case of the assessee on the basis of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 29/07/2022. The relevant extract of the assertion made by the Ld. Additional Solicitor General of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as contained in para 19(f) of the said order are reproduced as under: "19. Mr. N. Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, made the following submissions on behalf of the Revenue: a. Parliament enacted TOLA as a free-standing legislation to provide relief and relaxation to both the assesses and the Revenue during the time of COVID-19. TOLA seeks to relax actions and proceedings that could not be completed or complied with within the original time limits specified under the Income Tax Act; b. Section 149 of the new regime provides three crucial benefits to the assesses: (i) the four-year time limit for all situations has been reduced to three years; (ii) the first proviso to Section 149 ensures that re-assessment fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....021 as show-cause notices in terms of Section 148A(b). Thereafter, the Revenue issued notices under Section 148 of the new regime between July and August 2022. Invalidation of the Section 148 notices issued under the new regime on the ground that they were issued beyond the time limit specified under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA will completely frustrate the judicial exercise undertaken by this Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra). 11. Looking to the facts and considering the assessment year involved is 2015 16, notice issued in the case of originally on 29/06/2021 and later on 29/07/2022 which both the dates have fallen on or after 1st April, 2021, therefore, both the notice deserves to be dropped in view of the admission made by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, for Assessment Year 2015-16, no notice u/s 148 of the Act could be issued after the expiring of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year which limitation expired on 31st March, 2022. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal (supra) has observed that TOLA is not applicable for Asst. Year 2015-16, therefore, even otherwise under the old provisions of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....priate stage as explained by the Court in those orders. 3. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms." 3. We heard Mr. Saswat Kumar Acharya, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants (assessee) and Mr. Chandrashekhar, the learned counsel appearing for the revenue. 4. 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, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020." 5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decision that is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after 1" April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the taxation and other laws (Rela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng/2025 is allowed. 8. ITA No.1079/Bang/2025 In this appeal, assessee has raised additional ground as noted supra. On going through the above additional ground, I noted that the issue raised is legal in nature. Therefore, relying on the judgment in the case of NTPC Ltd., the additional ground raised by the assessee is accepted. 9. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that income tax department had information that assessee has deposited huge cash of Rs. 1,12,95,185/- in his bank account. In spite of that assessee had not filed return of income. Accordingly, notice under section 148A(b) of the Act dated 29.03.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/7/148A(SCN)/2021-22/10411110175(1) was issued. Assessee furnished reply after following the due procedure. In response to the above notice assessee filed reply on 06.04.2022 wherein he has stated that he is rendering online tender services to several contractors. The deposits made are the amounts collected from the contractors which needs to be transferred to the government account in lieu of tender deposit on behalf of contracts. For this service, assessee is getting fee, the quantum of which assessee has not furnished. Accordingly, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Therefore, the period of more than three years is not applicable. This issue has rightly been deleted by the learned CIT(A) in his Order which is as under: 5.4 Thus, in view of provision of section 149(1) of the I.T. Act, no notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act shall be issued if three years but not more than 10 years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the AO has in his possession evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax represented in the form of asset is likely to amount Rs. 50 lakhs or more has escaped assessment. In the instant case as stated earlier the AO was in possession of evidence that during the relevant previous year appellant has deposited cash of Rs. 1,12,95,185/- in his bank account, however has not filed return of income for the relevant previous year. Therefore, order passed by the AO u/s 148A(d) of the I.T. Act is found to be in accordance with the provision of law and consequent issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act is a valid notice. 5.5 It is required to be mentioned at this stage that as per provision u/s 149(1) of the I.T. Act, at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act the AO should ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, the learned Counsel raised issue by way of additional grounds as noted supra that the AO has not issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act after filing of return of income by the assessee. Therefore, AO had no jurisdiction to make reassessment under section 147 of the Act and relied on the following judgments: i. Anita Garg Vs. Income tax Officer (New Delhi) ITA No.4053/Del/2024 ii. CBDT Instruction No. F.No.225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.06.2017 14. Further, assessee submitted that on merits of the case that the assessee filed return under section 44AD of the Act after taking into account the gross commission received from the contractors of Rs. 5,78,433/- in which assessee has declared income of Rs. 86,765/- which is more than quantum prescribed under section 44AD of the Act filed on 21.06.2022. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the entire details were produced of 56 contractors from whom assessee has received gross commission of Rs. 5,78,433/- and in this regard no further questions were asked by the AO. Therefore, income reported by the assessee must be considered. 15. On the other hand, learned DR relied on the Order of lower authoriti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee is that notice issued under section 148 of the Act is barred by limitation. I am in agreement with the arguments of the learned DR that the notice was validly issued beyond the period of 3 years. Before issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, during the course of proceedings under section 148A(b)/148A(d) of the Act against which the reply submitted by the assessee is not complete to satisfaction of the AO. Therefore, at the time of issue of notice, prima facie opinion of the AO was that amount escaped is Rs. 1,12,95,185/-. In fact assessee is facilitating the contractors but for want of details the AO has rightly issued notice under section 148 of the Act which is within limitation period of more than six years years because the escapement of income is more than Rs. 50 lakhs. The notice issued is within the prescribed time as per provision of section 149(1)(b) of the Act. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act is within the time prescribed under section 149b of the Act. Therefore I reject the arguments of the learned Counsel on this point. Even during the course of proceedings u/s 148A9b) of the Act the objection filed by the assessee could not correlate the tra....