2026 (4) TMI 1029

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 04/04/2022 is barred by limitation of time and C. The prescribed procedure laid down u/s. 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has not been followed. Thus, it is prayed to set-aside the assessment order being the same as void-ab-initio. Grounds of Appeal No. 02 : The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred on law and facts by confirming the additions of Rs. 46,20,000/- made in the assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 26/03/2024 and the same is liable to deleted. Grounds of Appeal No. 03 : The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred on law and facts by confirming the additions of Rs. 12,33,000/- made u/s. 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 26/03/2024 and the same is liable to be deleted. Grounds of Appeal No. 04 : The appellant seeks liberty to modify/alter/amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal or raise any grounds of appeal during appeal proceedings." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and not filed his return of income. Thereafter the case of the assessee wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the assessee is not correct. The Ld.AR also submitted that the difference between the stamp value and the consideration mentioned in the sale deed could not be taken as income of the assessee when the property was jointly purchased by the assessee as well as his wife. The Ld.AR therefore submitted that both on legal grounds as well as on merits, the assessment could not be sustained and prayed to allow the appeal. The Ld.AR submitted that even though the assessee had not appeared before the Ld.CIT(A), the legal issues as well as the issues on merits are very much visible and therefore prayed to decide the appeal on merits as well as on the legal issues. The Ld.AR also filed a paper book enclosing the various documents and also relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. The Ld.AR also filed the written submissions in support of the grounds raised by him. The Ld.AR also filed a copy of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal order in the case of Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 5519/Del/2024 dated 15/10/2025 in support of their legal submissions. 6. The Ld.DR submitted that the assessee was a non-filer and when there is no proceedings u/s. 147, the income might have ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e not accepting the said submission made by the Ld.DR for the reason that the AO had not considered the request made by the assessee on 28/03/2022 and therefore the said submission does not holds good. Further, the non-raising of the said dispute before the authorities would not be a reason to term the illegal proceedings as a legal proceeding. Therefore, the submissions made by the Ld.DR does not holds good on the facts of the present case and we therefore accept the ground raised by the assessee that the notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act is bad in law. Our view was also supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court reported in (2023) 153 taxmann.com 70 (Bombay) in the case of Mukesh J. Ruparel vs. ITO wherein it was held that the mandatory requirement of giving minimum 7 days of time to assessee to reply to such notice u/s. 148A(b) was not fulfilled and therefore the impugned notice and the further order passed u/s. 148A(d) along with the notice issued u/s. 148 were to be quashed and set aside. 10. The another legal ground raised by the assessee is that the limitation for issuing notice u/s. 148 was barred as per amended provisions, from section 147 to 151 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....relevant finding of the Tribunal is extracted as below: "5. The first contention of ld. Counsel is that Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 30/07/2022 is barred by limitation in terms of first proviso to section 149(1) as six years from the end of AY 2015-16 expired on 31/03/2022. Ld. Counsel submitted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 30/07/2022 issued under the amended regime is barred by limitation in terms of first proviso to section 149(1) as six years from the end of the assessment year i.e. AY 2015-16 had elapsed on 31/03/2022 and as such the notice u/s 148 dated 30/07/2022 has been issued after expiry of limitation period. It is submitted that the first proviso of section 149(1) of the Act specifically provides that no notice u/s 148 could be issued in relation to assessment years prior to 01/04/2021 wherein six years have elapsed. The relevant proviso is reproduced hereunder for ready reference: 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 a notice under section 148 or section 153A or section 153C could not have been issued at that time....