TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 2122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that in the course of hearing before us, the assessee has raised certain Additional grounds of appeal whereby it has challenged the validity of the notices issued u/s 148 of the Act as well reassessment orders in all the above assessment years claiming to be bad in law and ab initio void. Since the grounds are legal in nature and go into the very roots of the assessment orders, in the light of the decision of in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC),they are admitted for adjudication at the outset in the paras to follow. ITA 6122/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2013-14)& ITA 6123/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Additional Ground(common in both the AYs): 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice issued u/s 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961 by the Ld. A.O. is an invalid notice and the reassessment order passed thereafter is grossly incorrect, invalid and bad-in-law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. A.O. has erred by issuing the notice u/s 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961 after the Surviving Time Limit. In this regard, the assessee relies on the judicial decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....49. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year -- (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b); (b) if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax, represented in the form of asset, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year: 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 such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of clause (b) of sub- section (1) of this section, as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021: Provided further that the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply in a case, where a notice under section 153A, or section 153C read with sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, -- (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b) or clause (c); (b) if four years, but not more than six years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to one lakh rupees or more for that year; (c) if four years, but not more than sixteen years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income in relation to any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment. Explanation.-- In determining income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment for the purposes of this sub-section, the provisions of Explanation 2 of section 147 shall apply as they apply for the purposes of that section. (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151. (3) If the person on whom a notice under section 148 is to be served ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eemed to be noticed under section 148A(b) of the Act, are covered under the extended time limit till 30.06.2021 provided under the TOLA. 6. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the surviving time under the Act read with the TOLA will be available to the Revenue to complete the remaining proceedings in furtherance of the deemed notice, including issuance of re-assessment notice under section 148 of the Act under the new regime. While explaining the methodology for computation of the surviving or balance time limit, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph-112 of Rajeev Bansal (supra) observed as follows: - "112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on 1 May 2021 under the old regime for a relevant assessment year. Because of the legal fiction, the deemed show cause notices will also come into effect from 1 May 2021. After accounting for all the exclusions, the assessing officer will have sixty-one days [days between 1 May 2021 and 30 June 2021] to issue a notice under Section 148 of the new regime. This time starts ticking for the assessing officer after receiving the response of the assessee. In this instance, if the assessee submits the respons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....)14 days 14/06/2022 8. Reply filed by the assessee No Reply filed 9. Time excluded as per Rajeev Bansal 30/06/2021 to 14/06/2022 10. Time that was available/left to issue notice u/s 148 as per TOLA limit 2 days- 28/06/2021 to 30/06/2021 11. Extended time to be given as per fourth Proviso to section 149(1) 7 days from 14-06-2022, i.e. 21/06/2022 if one goes by the date of filing reply on 14-06-2022. 12. Time limit to issue notice u/s 148 as per section 149 as amended by Finance Act 2021 and as per Rajeev Bansal case 21/06/2022, ie, 7 days from 14-06-2022. 13. Order passed w/s 148A(d) 27/07/2022 14. Actual date of notice u/s 148 27/07/2022 7.1 Therefore, in computing the surviving/balance time limit, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra), we find that the Revenue had only 2 days (i.e., between 28/06/2021 to 30/06/2021) to issue notice under section 148 of the Act of the new regime in the present casein this case. No response was received from the assessee. Time limit to issue notice u/s 148 as per section 149 as amended by Finance Act 2021 and as per Rajeev Bansal case would b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC), wherein it is mentioned at para 19(f) that, "The Revenue /concedes that for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA." 11. Since the grounds go into the roots of the entire proceedings in the relevant assessment years, they are being adjudicated together in the paras to follow. In the above assessment year, reassessment notice u/s 148 of the Act had been issued on 26.07.2022 which is matter of record and there is no dispute on it. In this regard, the ld.AR has claimed that in view of the departmental stand taken by the ld.Counsel of the Revenue before the hon'ble Supreme Court in the Rajeev Bansal case, the proceeding are liable to be invalid. The ld.DR has not controverted his contentions in any manner. It may be stated here that in the case of Union of India and Others v. Rajeev Bansal(supra), the hon'ble Supreme Court considered the manner of applicability of the provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 [TOLA]. During the said proceedings, it was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against the requirement of approval to be taken u/s 151(ii) of the I. T. Act, 1961 from Pr. CCIT. Hence, the notice issued u/s 148 is an invalid notice. 16. In the additional grounds no.1 and 2 above in both the above appeals, the assessee has contested the validity of the notice u/s 148 of the Act and the consequent reassessment order claiming that the orders have been passed without obtaining approval of appropriate authorities. Since the grounds are identical and go into the roots of the entire proceedings in both the assessment years i.e. 2016-17 and 201718, they are being adjudicated together in the paras to follow. 17. Before us, during hearing of the appeal, the ld.Authorised Representative in support of the legal grounds has taken us through all the relevant facts of the case relating to action u/s 148 of the Act, present position of the law in this regard and also the legal implications arising on account of the recent decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court relating to the instant issue. It is contented that order 148A(d) was passed with the approval of Pr.CIT-Centra-3, Mumbai. The notice u/s. 148 of the Act was also issued with the prior approval of the Pr. Commissioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om the end of the assessment year. The order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act was passed by the AO on 27.07.2022. Fresh notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer on 27.07.2022. It is evident that while passing the order u/s 148A(d), the AO had obtained the prior approval of the Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-3, Mumbai. This fact is mentioned at paras 3.3 and 3.5 of the order. Further, the notice u/s 148 of the Act was also issued with the prior approval of the Pr. Commissioner of Incometax, Central-3, Mumbai, a fact on record uncontroverted by the ld.DR. 19.2 Likewise AY 2017-18 was taken up for reassessment by the notice dated 28.06.2021. Relevant assessment year in the case is 2017-18. The reassessment was initiated after period of three years from the end of the assessment year. The order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act was passed by the AO on 27.07.2022. Fresh notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued by the on 27.07.2022. It is evident that while passing the order u/s 148A(d), the AO had obtained the prior approval of the Pr. Commissioner of Incometax, Central-3, Mumbai. This fact is mentioned at paras 3.3 and 3.5 of the order. Further, the notice u/s 148 of the Ac....