TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 39
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appeals are taken up together for disposal, by dealing with the facts in ITA No. 7443/Del/2025 for assessment year 2013-14 is taken as lead case. 3. The facts in brief as culled out from para 3 of the impugned order are as under: Notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was issued with prior approval of the Competent Authority in the case of the assessee for the reasons there was credit transaction of Rs. 1,03,40,940/- as accommodation entry in the form of LTCG during the FY 2012-13 relevant to the AY 2013-14. The assessee HUF had filed return of income for A. Y. 2013-14 on 11.07.2013 declaring total income of Rs. 3,63,220/- u/s. 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ITR has been filed on 20.08.2022 in which the same total income is declared. In both the returns of income so furnished, the assessee has claimed exempt LTCG of Rs. 99,26,302/-on which STT was paid. The assessee HUF has not mentioned the details of business in the ITR. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was issued vide DIN: ITBA/AST/F/143(2)_5/2022-23/1049911883(1) on 22/12/2022." 4. Against the assessment order, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ken/provided by him neither for the Notice issued u/s. l48 under repealed Act nor under the present Act 2021, after being repeatedly asked by the assessee and therefore the SCN u/s. 148A(b) and order passed u/s. 148A(d) is illegal and without jurisdiction liable to be quashed and consequently all the subsequent proceedings is void- ab- intio and illegal. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT (A) erred in upholding the impugned order passed by the respondent as the respondent had passed the impugned assessment order without assuming jurisdiction as law and without complying with the mandatory conditions of section 147 to 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and reopening of the case is bad in law and beyond the jurisdiction of the Ld. A.O. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT (A) erred in upholding the impugned order passed by the respondent as the respondent had passed the impugned assessment order without complying with the mandatory requirements of section 148A(b) in compliance with the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ashish Agarwal to provide material and documents relied upon and therefore the order passe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....culation of time barred notice u/s. 148 of the Act. It was argued that the case is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court of India in Union of India &Ors. vs. Rajeev Bansal(2024) 469 ITR 46. (SC). It was further argued that since neither the AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) has considered the said aspects regarding the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was barred by limitation, therefore, the notice u/s. 148 be quashed and also consequent assessment may also be quashed. 7. We have also heard the Ld. DR who was supplied with the paper book, and after going through Page No. 1 containing the table for the calculation of time-barred notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the Ld. DR has submitted that the Bench may consider the submissions with respect to the applicability of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajiv Bansal case (supra) in its own discretion and has prayed for restoring the file to the AO for deciding the matter afresh. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. Page no. 1 of the paper book containing the details in respect of notice dated 27.07.2022 and 29.07.2022 u/s. 148 of the Act being time barred is extracted as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notice u/s. 148 pursuant to section 148A(d) was issued on 27.07.2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) and 29.07.2022(A.Y. 2014-15), well beyond the permissible limitation. 11. We have heard rival submissions of the parties including the challenge to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue notices u/s. 148 of the Act beyond the limitation period. The controversy lies in a narrow compass-whether the notice issued u/s. 148 on 27.07.2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) and 29.07.2022(A.Y. 2014-15) is barred by limitation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal (supra) has conclusively interpreted the interplay between the amended provisions of sections 148 and 149, the old regime, and TOLA. Significantly, the Revenue itself conceded before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that for A.Y. 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 are liable to be dropped, as they would not fall for completion within the period prescribed under TOLA. 12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the extended ten-year limitation u/s. 149(1)(b), as amended, operates prospectively, and for earlier assessment years, the test is whether the six-year period under the old regime was still ali....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s) and the Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution by the assessee. 6. In the case of Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) the Jurisdictional High Court considered whether reassessment completed for the AY 2015-16 based on a notice issued u/s. 148 and the viz a viz the applicability of the provisions of TOLA and based on the concession of the Revenue that for the AY 2015-16 all the notices issued on or after 1.4.2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the TOLA, held that the notice issued under 148 was beyond the period of limitation and consequently the same is liable to be set aside. 7. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Steel & Power Ltd. Vs. CBDT & Others (supra) quashed the notices issued u/s. 148 observing as under: - "2. These appeals arise from 'the order passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition (C) Nos. 2446 of 2823, 2543 of 2023 dated 1.2.2023 and 2544 of 2023 dated 10.02.2023 respectively by which the High Court disposed of the original writ petitions in the following terms :- "1. The memo of appe....