TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1961
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eedings against the return of income filed in response to notice u/s 148 of IT Act. 3. On facts and circumstances of the case, the reassessment proceedings have been initiated u/s 147/148/148A of IT Act without making compliance of provisions of sec 149(1) of IT Act and therefore, the reassessment proceedings and consequent reassessment order are needs to be quashed. 4. The impugned assessment is invalid and without jurisdiction as the said assessment has been initiated and completed without complying with legal requirements of the provisions of section 147/148/148A/151 of the Income Tax Act, therefore such assessment is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 5. The Ld. AO has erred both in law and circumstances of the case in initiating action u/s 147/148A of IT Act ignoring the fact that the proceedings have been initiated without application of independent mind on the material, if any, available. In view of the above defects in the compliances the resultant reassessment proceedings are required to be set aside. 6. The Ld. AO has erred both in law and circumstances of the case in initiating action u/s 147/148/148A of IT Act ignoring the fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. Original period of Limitation u/s 149 31.03.2021 4. Extended Period of Limitation as per IT Act read with TOLA 30.06.2021 6 Date of original notice u/s 148 under unamended Act 22.06.2021 6-7 7. Time surviving from date of issuance of deemed SCN till expiry of period as extended by TOLA [from 30.06.2021] 8 days 8. Date of issue of notice u/s 14BA(b) 26.05.2022 8-10 9. Due date for filing of reply to notice issued u/s 148A(h) 09.06.2022 8-10 10. Reply/objection filed on 10.06.2022 11-18 11. Extended date by which notice should have been issued u/s 148 (10+ 7) 18.06.2022 7. Actual date of issuance of notice u/s 148 22-07-2022 27-28 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal (469 ITR 46). It is submitted that in view of the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (supra), the extended due date for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act expired on 18.06.2022 and since, the notice u/s 148 of the Act is issued on 22.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITR 1 (SC) dated 04.05.2022. Thereafter, the ld AO issued letter u/s 148A(b) of the Act on 26.05.2022 and subsequently, on 17.06.2022. The assessee filed its reply on 24.06.2022. The ld AO passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 23.07.2022 rejecting the objections of the assessee and proceeded to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act on 23.07.2022. All these facts are not in dispute before us with regard to dates. Now the short question that arises for our consideration is as to whether the subsequent notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 23.07.2022 is to be treated as time barred or not in the light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). In this regard, it would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant portion of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal referred (supra) as under:- "110. The effect of the creation of the legal fiction in Ashish Agarwal (supra) was that it stopped the clock of limitation with effect from the date of issuance of Section 148 notices under the old regime [which is also the date of issuance of the deemed notices]. As discussed in the prece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der Section 148 of the new regime will end on 18 August 2022." 4. Now let us see whether the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 23.07.2022 is within the time in the light of the aforesaid observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. For this purpose, the following table would be relevant which is reproduced as under:- S. No. Particulars Date A Date of original notice issued u/s 148 28.06.2021 B Time remaining Gill 30.06.2021 2 Day C Date of notice issued w/s 148A(b) 26.05.2022 & 17.06.2022 D Due date for filing of reply to notice issued u/s 148A(b) 09.06.2022 & 24.06.2022 E Reply/objection filed on 24.06.2022 F Extended date by which notice should have been issued u/s 148 (E + B) 26.06.2022 G Actual date of notice issued u/s 148 23.07.2022 5. Hence, in view of the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (supra), the extended due date for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act expired on 26.06.2022 and since, the notice u/s 148 of the Act is issued on 23.07.2022, the said notice is to be treated as barred by limitation and consequentially reassessment proceedi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the reassessment proceedings, which began on 01.06.2021, to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The said notice was required to be accompanied by an order under Section 148A (d) of the Act. Thus, the AO was required to pass an order under Section 148A (d) of the Act within the said twenty-nine days notwithstanding the time stipulated under section 148A (d) of the Act. This period expired on 12.07.2022. 70. Since the period of limitation, as provided under Section 149 (1) of the Act, had expired prior to issuance of the impugned notice on 30.07.2022. The said is squarely beyond the period of limitation. 71. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that the AO is required to pass an order under Section 148A (d) of the Act by the end of the month following the month on which the reply to the notice under section 148A (b) of the Act was received. Thus, the order under section 148A (d) of the Act as well as the notice under Section 148 of the Act (both dated 30.07.2022) are within the prescribed period. This contention is without merit as it does not take into account that proceedings under Section 148A of the Act necessarily required to be completed within ....