AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2015-16 arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, De lhi’ s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/102257039(1) dated 03.11.2025, in proceedings u/ s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in shor t “the Act”).
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
I no tice during the course of he aring that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reopening itself set into motio n by the learned Assessing Officer vide section 148 notice issued on 05.04.2022. This is for the precise reason that the department alre ady appears to have conceded the very issue of limitation aspect in Unio n of India Vs. Rajiv Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) that the provision of Taxation and O ther Law s [Re laxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions] Act, 2020 “TOLA” would no t apply for assessment year 2015-16 herein. It further emerges that the very issue between the parties is no more res integra in light of the tribunal’s rece nt learned coordinate bench’s order dated 23.07.2025 passed in ITA No. 2307/Del/2025 (Sh. Deepak Agarwal vs. DCIT) having quashed a similar reop ening therein, reading as under:
“2 . The Ld. Counsel for the assesse e, at t he outset, submits t hat in the case of the assessee a notice u/s 148 was issued on 30.07.2022 under ne w law which is bar red by limi tation si nce the provisi ons o f taxati on and ot her laws (rel axati on and amendment of certai n provisions ) (TOLA) are not applicable for the AY 2015-16 as held by the Hon’bl e Juri sdictional Hi gh Cour t in the case of Ma ke My Trip (India ) Pvt. Ltd. i n WP(c) 2558/2023 dated 24.03.2025.
3.Ld. Counsel further submits t hat recently t he Ho n’bl e Supr eme Co ur t i n the cases of Dee pak Steels & Power Ltd. Vs. CBDT a nd Others in Civil Appeal No .5177/2025 dated 02.04.2025 noted t hat the R ev enue made a co ncessi on befor e t he H on’bl e Supr eme Co urt whil e disposi ng of f t he appeal in the cas e of Uni on of Indi a & Others Vs. Rajiv Bansal (2024) (SCC ) O nli ne SC 2693, that for the AY 2015-16 notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 will have t o b e dropped as the y would not fall for com pletion during the peri od p res cribed unde r t he TOLA. Ld. C ounsel als o submitted t hat similar view has bee n take n by the H on’bl e S uprem e Co urt i n the case of ACIT Vs . Nehal Rashid S hah i n SLP (Civil) Diar y No. (S) 57209/2024 dated 4.4.2025. T herefore, it i s submitted tha t i n the light of thes e decisions the reassessme nt framed for the A Y 2015-16 base d on t he notic e issued u/s 148 of the Act dat ed 30.07.2022, is tim e barred and bad i n law.
4.Ld. DR suppor ted t he ord ers of the Assessi ng Officer.
5.He ard ri val contentio ns, perused t he orders of the aut horities belo w. Admitt edly i n t hi s case notice u/s 148 was issue d on 30. 07.2022 under new law based on whic h the reassessment for the A Y 2015-16 was framed by t he AO on 31.5.2023. The reassess ment was challe nged before the Ld. C IT(Appe als) and the Ld. C IT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecuti on by t he assessee.
6.In the cas e of Make My Tri p (Indi a) Pvt . Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) the Jurisdictional Hi gh Court co nsidered whether reassessment compl eted for the A Y 2015-16 bas ed on a notice issued u/s 148 and the viz a viz t he applicability of the provisi ons of TOLA and base d o n the concession of t he Revenue that for the AY 2015-16 all the notices iss ued on or after 1.4.2 021 wi ll have to be drop ped as the y will not fall f or completion duri ng t he perio d pr esc ribed und er t he TOLA, held that the no tice issued under 148 was beyond the period of limitation and consequently t he s ame is li able t o be s et aside.
7.Further the Hon’ble Supr eme Court in t he case of Deepak S teel & Power L td. Vs. CBDT & Others (s upra) quashed the notices issued u/s 148 obse rvi ng as under: -
“2 . Thes e appeals ari se fr om 't he order pas sed by t he High C ourt of Orissa at Cutt ac k i n Writ Petition (C ) Nos. 2446 of 2823, 2543 of 2023 date d 1. 2.2023 and 2544 of 2023 dat ed 10.02.2023 r espectively by whic h the Hi gh Cour t dispose d of t he ori gi nal writ petitions in t he foll owi ng terms:-
"1 . The memo of appearance filed by Mr . S . S. Mohapa tra, learned S eni or Sta nding Counsel for Revenue De partm ent on behalf of Opposite Par ties is ta ken on r ecord.
2.In vie w of the order passed by this Co ur t on 1s t December , 2022 in a batch of writ petitions of which W.P. (C ) Mo.9191 of 2022 (Kailash Kedia v. Income Tax Officer) was a lead matter and t he subseque nt order dated 10t h January , 2023 passed i n W.P.(C ) Mo.36314 of 2022 (Shiv Mettalicks Pv t. Ltd., Rourkel a v. Pri ncipal C ommissioner of Inc ome Tax, Sambalpur), the Court declines to ent ertain t he present writ petition, but l eaves it open to t he Petitioner to rais e all gr ounds available to t he Petiti oner i n acc ordanc e with l aw includi ng the grounds urged in the pr ese nt petition at the appropriate sta ge as explai ned by t he Court i n those orders .
3.The writ petition is disposed of i n t he above ter ms. "
3.We heard Mr . Saswat Kumar Achar ya, the l earned counsel appearing for t he appellants (ass essee) and Mr. Chandras hekhar, the lear ned c ounsel appear ing f or the revenue.
4.The learned co unsel appeari ng for the rev enue wi th his us ual fairness invit ed t he attention of t hi s Co urt to a three j udge bench decision of this Court in Uni on of Indi a and Ors. v. Rajeev B ansal , report ed i n 2024 SCC OnLi ne SC 2693, more partic ularly, paragra ph 19(f ) whic h reads thus:-
"19.(f) The R ev enue concedes that for t he assessment year 2 015- 2016, all notices issued on or aft er April 1, 2021 will hav e to be dr opped as they will not fall for c ompletion during the peri od prescribed under the Taxati on and other Laws (Relaxati o n and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020."
5.As the revenue made a conc ession in t he af ores aid deci sion that is for the assessment ye ar 2015-2016, all notices issued o n or after 1st April, 2021 will have t o be drop ped as they woul d not fall f or compl etion duri ng the pe riod pres cribed under t he taxati on and othe r laws (Rela xation and Amendment of certai n P rovisions Act, 2020). N othi ng further is required to be adjudicated i n this matter as t he notices s o f ar as the present litigati on is concerned is dat ed 25.6.2021.
6.In view of the afore said, i n s uc h circumstances ref erred t o above the ori ginal writ petiti on nos.2446 of 2023, 2543 of 2023 and 2544 of 2023 respectively filed before the High C ourt of Orissa at cut tack stands allowed.
7.The impugned notice t herei n stands quashe d and set aside.”
8.Above decisions squarely appl ies to the fac t situati on of the assessee and ther efo re respec tfully followi ng t he above decisions, we hold that the noti ces issued u/s 148 on or after 1.4.2021 for r eopeni ng t he assessment for the A Y 2015-16 are barred by limitation and consequently the r eassessment mad e bas ed on such notices are bad i n law and void ab initi o. T hus, t he impugned reassessment order havi ng been made purs uant t o no tice issued u/s 148 dated 30.07.2022 the reass essme nt order is her eby held to be bad i n law and the sam e is quashed. Ground Nos . B, C & D of grounds of a ppeal of the as sessee are allo wed.”
I adopt the abo ve extracted detailed reasoning mutatis mutandis to quash the reopening in the instant case in very terms. All the Revenue’s vehement conte ntions supporting the same are hereby rejected.
All other pleadings between the parties on merits etc. stand re ndered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms