AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 15.07.2025 for the A.Y. 2013-14.
Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that notice dated 29.07.2022 issued u/s.148 of the Act is barred by limitation for the reason that the same is issued beyond the survival period as per the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ram Balram Build Home Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (447 ITR 133) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashish Aggarwal (444 ITR 1).
Referring to the table furnished before us showing the sequence of events and the limitation as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashish Aggarwal (444 ITR 1), Ld. Counsel submits that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act dated 29.07.2022 is beyond the surviving period. Ld. Counsel submits that the survival period of one day + 7 days as specified u/s.148A(d) of the Act expired on 25.07.2022 and therefore, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act on 29.07.2022 is barred by limitation.
Ld. Counsel further submitted that a short note on limitation which is as under :-
SHORT NOTE ON LIMITATION
S. No. Particulars Appellant's Case Ram Balram Buildhome (P) Ltd. 1. Assessment Year 2013-14 2013-14 2. First Notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') 29.06.2021 01.06.2021 3. Surviving time till 30.06.2021 1 day 29 days 4. SCN issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act in pursuance to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of UOI v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) 20.05.2022 30.05.2022 5. Reply filed on 18.07.2022 13.06.2022 6. Period expired to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act on (minimum 7 days, since less than 7 days to pass an order under section 148A(d) of the Act) 25.07.2022 12.07.2022 7. Second Notice issued u/s 148 of the Act 29.07.2022 30.07.2022 1.It is submitted that in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO, (2025) 477 ITR 133 (Delhi), paras 66-73, the Notice dated 29.07.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act in the present case is beyond the prescribed period of limitation under section 149(1)(b) of the Act and the surviving time prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ashish Agarwal (supra), and therefore liable to be quashed.
2.Further reliance, in this regard, is placed on the following decisions of this Hon'ble Tribunal, wherein similar Notices issued under section 148 of the Act were quashed on this ground:
a. Prabhat Kumar v. ACIT, ITA No. 1666/Del/2024 – paras 4-7
Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. We find considerable merit in the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. The contention of the assessee and the sequence of events were not controverted with the evidences by the revenue. Thus, respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rambalram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) we hold that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act dated 29.07.2022 is barred by limitation and consequently the assessment framed on the basis of such notice is bad in law and void abinitio and accordingly the reassessment is quashed. Ground No.1 of grounds of appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Since we have quashed the reassessment on legal issue the grounds on merits are not adjudicated at this stage as they become academic in nature and they are left open.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above.