KUBER PLANTERS LIMITED,DELHI V. DCIT, NFAC, DELHI

ITA 1936/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Kuber Planters Ltd, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning an assessment year 2015-16. The primary contention was the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was claimed to be time-barred. The tribunal examined the timeline of notices and the applicability of the Finance Act, 2021, which amended the provisions of section 148. The Supreme Court's decision in Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal was pivotal, establishing that notices issued under the unamended provisions for the assessment year 2015-16 were indeed time-barred if issued after 1.4.2021.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840046 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal, Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal, Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal vs DCIT, Sarthak Gupta vs. ITO, IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJ KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reassessment proceedings; Period of limitation; Reopening of assessment; Time period of passing order
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Kuber Planters Ltd, S-32, Part-1,Greater Kailash, Delhi Vs. DCIT, NFAC, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACCK8875E Assessee by : Shri Raj Kumar, CA Shri Suraj Gupta, ADv Revenue by: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 26/02/2026 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.1936/Del/2024 for AY 2015-16, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 04.03.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 10.05.2023 by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. The assessee has challenged the validity of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act, wherein, it has been pleaded that the notice u/s 148 of the Act is barred by limitation vide Additional Ground No.1. This goes to root the matter and hence the same is hereby admitted and taken up first for adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 Kuber Planters Ltd Page | 2 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Notice u/s 148 of the Act was generated on 31.3.2021 and stood issued to the assessee on 6.4.2021. The ld AR pleaded that the said notice issued was as per old provisions of Section 148 of the Act prior to the substitution by Finance Act, 2021. It was submitted that Section 148 of the Act has been substituted by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f 01.04.2021 wherein notice u/s 148 of the Act as per the old provisions of Section 148 of the Act applicable upto 31.03.2021 could not have been issued after 31.03.2021. This issue per se was subject matter of various writ petitions filed in various High Courts and ultimately got settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal reported in 444 ITR 1 (SC) dated 04.05.2022. Thereafter, the ld AO issued letter u/s 148A(b) of the Act on 26.10.2022. The assessee filed its reply on 10.11.2022. The ld AO passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 26.12.2022 rejecting the objections of the assessee and proceeded to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act on 26.12.2022. All these facts are not in dispute before us with regard to dates. Now the short question that arises for our consideration is as to whether the subsequent notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 26.12.2022 is to be treated as time barred or not in the light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal reported in 469 ITR 46 (SC). It is pertinent to note that Taxation and Other Laws Amendment (TOLA) is applicable for all the events / actions which were getting time barred between 20.3.2020 to 31.3.2021. In the instant case, the alleged escaped income was more than Rs 50 lacs and hence notice under section 148 of the Act had been issued within 6 years from the end of the relevant assessment year i.e. upto 31.3.2022. Hence the matter was not getting time barred between 20.3.2020 to 31.3.2021 and hence TOLA provisions are not applicable to the facts of the instant case. In the case of Rajeev Bansal supra before Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 Kuber Planters Ltd Page | 3 the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the revenue itself conceded that TOLA provisions are not applicable for Assessment Year 2015-16 and therefore all notices issued after 1.4.2021 under unamended provisions will have to be dropped. In this case, the notice under section 148 of the Act could be issued only upto 31.3.2022 but the same has been issued on 26.12.2022 which is time barred. The Learned AR placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal vs DCIT in ITA No. 6208/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2015-16 dated 9.1.2026 wherein it was held as under:- “2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assesse first of all argued the issue of limitation raised vide Ground No. 1 which reads as under:- “That under the facts and circumstances, notice u/s 148 dated 26.7.2022 is barred by limitation, as the limitation for issuing notice u/s. 148 for AY 2015-16 stood ended on 31.3.2022, more so, since, under the facts, AY 15-16 was not covered by TOLA as the normal limitation period was to expire on 31.3.02 and not on 30.6.21 and also being bared by limitation as Revenue conceded before Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rajeev Bansal that all notices issued for AY 2015-16 have to be dropped.” 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessment order is barred by limitation in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC). Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that the assessment has been framed on the basis of second notice dated 26.7.2022 issued u/s. 148 of the Act. He explained the chronology wise list of relevant events, which reads as under:- Date Event 22.06.2021 1st notice u/s. 148 issued 04.05.2022 Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of UOI vs. Ashish Agarwal 21.05.2022 Notice u/s. 148A(b) issued 06.06.2022 Reply to Notice u/s. 148A(b) filed 26.07.2022 Order u/s. 148A(d) passed 26.07.2022 2nd notice u/s. 148 issued 25.05.2023 Assessment completed based on 2nd notice u/s. 148 dated 26.7.2022. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 Kuber Planters Ltd Page | 4 2.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee further argued that in this case the alleged escapement of income was more than Rs. 50 lacs and hence, notice u/s. 148 could have been issued within 6 years from the end of the relevant assessment year i.e. upto 31.03.2022. He further stated that the matter was not getting time barred between 20.03.2020 to 31.3.2021, therefore, TOLA provisions were not applicable. He stated that Revenue through ASG itself conceded in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal that TOLA provisions are not applicable for AY 2015-16, therefore, all notice issued after 1.4.2021 under un-amended provisions will have to be dropped. He further stated that notice for AY 2015-16 could have been issued after 31.3.2022, however, since the impugned notice issued u/s. 148 was issued on 26.7.2022, hence, it is barred by limitation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee cited the relevant extract of the judgment in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal, which reads as under:- “19.Mr. N. Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, made the following submissions on behalf of the Revenue: b. c. d e. The Finance Act 2021 substituted the old regime for reassessment with a new regime. The first proviso to Sec. 149 does not expressly bar the application of TOLA. Section 3 of TOLA applies to the entire Income Tax Act, including Sections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the first proviso to Sec. 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all the notices issued between 1st April, 2021 and 30 June, 2021 pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18 will be within the period of limitation as explained in the tabulation below: ] Assessment year (1) Within 3 years (2) Expiry of Limitation read with TOLA for (2) (3) Within six years (4) Expiry of Limitation read with TOLA for (4) (5) 2013-14 31.3.2017 TOLA not applicable 31.3.2020 30.6.2021 2014-15 31.3.2018 TOLA not applicable 31.3.2021 30.6.2021 2015-16 31.3.2019 TOLA not applicable 31.3.2022 TOLA not applicable 2016-17 31.3.2020 30.6.2021 31.3.2023 TOLA not applicable 2017-18 31.3.2021 30.6.2021 31.3.2024 TOLA not applicable f. The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015- 16, all notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 Kuber Planters Ltd Page | 5 prescribed under TOLA. ” ……114. In view of the above discussion, we conclude that: a. After 1 April, 2021, the Income Tax Act has to be read along with the substituted provisions. b. TOLA will continue to apply to the Income Tax Act after 1 April 2021 if any action or proceeding specified under the substituted provisions of the Income Tax Act falls for completion between 20 March 2020 and 31st March 2021; c. Section 3(1) of TOLA overrides Section 149 of the Income Tax Act only to the extent of relaxing the time limit for issuance of reassessment notice under section 148. ” 3.2 Ld. Counsel for the assessee also filed the copies of judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sarthak Gupta vs. ITO [2025] 179 taxmann.com 572 (Delhi) and IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (WP©) 17639/2022 (DHC) dated 13.12.2024 wherein, exactly on identical facts, even the same date of notice was issued u/s. 148 of the Act on 26.07.2022 for the assessment year 2015-16 was held as barred by limitation. When these facts were confronted to the Ld. CIT(DR), he could not controvert the above fact situation. 3.3 After hearing the rival contentions and gone through the above noted facts and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. Rajeev Bansal (Supra) and also decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sarthak Gupta vs. ITO and IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (Supra). We hold that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act dated 26.07.2022 is barred by limitation. Accordingly, assessment completed on 25.05.2023 based on second notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act dated 22.07.2022 is barred by limitation and accordingly, the same is set aside. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 4. Hence, in view of the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal (supra), the notice u/s 148 of the Act issued on 26.12.2022 is to be treated as barred by limitation and consequentially reassessment proceedings would be liable to be quashed as void ab initio. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1936/Del/2024 Kuber Planters Ltd Page | 6 5. Respectfully following the said decision, we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 26.12.2022 is barred by limitation. Accordingly, additional ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 6. Since, reopening of assessment has been quashed, the adjudication of the other grounds raised by the assessee and other additional grounds becomes academic in nature and they are left open. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/02/2026. -Sd/- -Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26/02/2026 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "