ESSEL HOUSING PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCLE-20, DELHI

ITA 1900/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by M/s Essel Housing Projects Private Ltd. against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi, for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The primary issues revolved around the proper service of notice to the assessee and the validity of the approval for issuing notices under the new regime of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in both cases, leading to the setting aside of the CIT(A)'s order for 2016-17 and the quashing of the assessment for 2017-18 due to improper approval.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707280 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARPAT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: VED JAIN; AMAN GARG
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.1899 & 1900/Del/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/s Essel Housing Projects Private Ltd., LGF-10, Vasant Square Mall, Vasant Kunj, Delhi – 110 070. PAN: AAACE6693G Vs DCIT, Circle-20, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Shri Aman Garg, CA Revenue by : Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 27.01.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. 2. At the time of hearing, in regard to the appeal for AY 2016-17, the ld. AR has pointed out that the assessee was not duly served. The ld. DR has defended the order of the CIT(A) submitting that notices on various dates were issued. However, after going through the impugned order, we find that although the fact of issuance of notices is mentioned, the manner of issuance of notices ITAs No.1899 & 1900/Del/2025 2 and an opinion on due service to the knowledge of the assessee is not recorded. Thus, it will be appropriate to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits. Thus, in regard to ITA No.1899/Del/2025 for AY 2016-17, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside with the direction to decide the issue afresh, after giving due notice of hearing to the assessee, as per law. 3. In regard to ITA No.1900/Del/2025 for AY 2017-18, the ld. AR has submitted that there was no valid approval for the purpose of section 151 of the Act and appreciating the contention of the ld. AR, we find that in the present case, order u/s 148A(d) has been passed and, thereafter, notice u/s 148 has been issued. The order u/s 148A(d) has been passed and notice issued on 27.07.2022, i.e., after three years from the end of AY 2017-18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 (10) TMI 264, order dated 03.10.2024, has held in para 81 as follows:- “81. This Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra) directed the assessing officers to “pass orders in terms of Section 148-A(d) in respect of each of the assesses concerned.” Further, it directed the assessing officers to issue a notice under Section 148 of the new regime “after following the procedure as required under Section 148-A.” Although this Court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval under Section 148A(a) and Section 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for Section 148A(d) and Section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval of the specified authority according to Section 151 of the new regime before passing an order under Section 148A(d) or issuing a notice under Section 148. These notices ought to have been issued following the time limits specified under Section 151 of the new regime read with TOLA, where applicable. ITAs No.1899 & 1900/Del/2025 3 4. Thus, prior approval of Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General and where these two authorities are not there, then, the Chief Commissioner or Director General are competent authorities to grant the approval. However, in the case in hand, such approval of these competent authorities have not been taken and the copy of notice on record shows that the approval has been accorded by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-1, New Delhi on 27.07.2022 which seems to have been as per the old regime. Thus, we are inclined to sustain the ground no.4 in impugned order for in AY 2017-18. The appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1900/Del/2025 is allowed. The impugned assessment is quashed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 09th July, 2025. dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "