INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI V. ANKIT AGARWAL (HUF), DELHI

ITA 953/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against Ankit Agarwal (HUF) concerning an assessment order for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The primary issue was the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was challenged as being time-barred. The CIT(A) had quashed the original assessment order, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Rajeev Bansal v. Union of India, which addressed the limitations on such notices. The Tribunal, after reviewing the arguments and the relevant legal provisions, dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 842364 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Rajeev Bansal v. Union of India [2023] 147 taxmann.com 549/453 ITR 153, UOI Vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJAT JAIN; AKSHAT
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKUSH KALRA
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 953/Del/2025 ITO Vs. Ankit Agarwal (HUF) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 953/Del/2025 ( A.Y 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Room NO. 910, 9th Floor, E-2 Block, Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi (APPLICANT) Vs Ankit Agarwal (HUF) 22A/15, Rajpur road, Civil Lines, Delhi-110054 PAN: AAKHA7629F (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 28/10/2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The grievance of the Revenue is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the Ld. CIT(A) vide order impugned by relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal v. Union of India [2023] 147 taxmann.com 549/453 ITR 153, quashed the assessment order. Appellant by Sh. Rajat Jain, CA and Sh. Akshat Jain, CA Respondent by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 27.02.2026 Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 953/Del/2025 ITO Vs. Ankit Agarwal (HUF) 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The impugned assessment order pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16 passed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short). It is It is not settled law that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2015-16 is barred by limitation as per the provisions of Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and TOLA was not applicable in respect of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16 on or after 1 April 2021, as conceded by the revenue itself in Para 19 of Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70). In view of the above, we find no reason to interfere with the findings and the conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing the Appeal of the Assessee. Accordingly, the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as meritless. 4. In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 27th Day of February, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27/02/2026 R. Naheed * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 953/Del/2025 ITO Vs. Ankit Agarwal (HUF) Printed from counselvise.com "