Raj Kumar Garg HUF vs ITO, Ward-1

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] dated 8.1.2026, for assessment year 2015-16.

Shri Depam Jain, appearing on behalf of assessee submitted that the assessee is assailing validity of the assessment order on the ground of jurisdiction. Narrating facts of the case, he submitted that notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 07.04.2021 for reopening of assessment for AY 2015-16. As per reasons for re-opening total quantum of income that had allegedly escaped assessment is Rs. 42,40,481/-. The ld. Counsel submitted that as per CBDT Instructions No. 01/2022 dated 11.5.2022, no notice u/s. 148 could been issued for AY 2015-16 where the income escaping assessment is less than Rs. 50 lacs. To buttress his arguments, he placed reliance on the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Rajeev Garg vs. CIT(A) in ITA No. 7804/Del/2025 (AY 2014-15) dated 16.2.2026 and Asseem Sehgal vs. ITO in ITA no. 154 to 156/Del/2205 dated 30.7.2025

Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar representing department vehemently supported the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. DR fairly stated that addition in the instant case is of Rs.42,19,481/-.

Heard both sides. Orders of the authorities below examined. As per the provisions of section 149 of the Act (as they were applicable to the instant case) no notice u/s. 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment or is likely to escape assessment amounts to Rs. 50 lacs or more. In light of the facts of the case and provisions of section 149(1) of the Act the assessment proceedings in the instant case are without jurisdiction. Similar view has been taken by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajeev Garg vs. CIT (Supra) and Division Bench decision in the case of Asseem Sehgal vs. ITO (Supra). In light of above facts, impugned order is set aside the appeal stands allowed.