Jasaram K. Rathod Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai considered an appeal filed by the assessee against an order dated 23 July 2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year (AY) 2013–14.
The assessee had originally filed his return of income on 1 November 2013 declaring total income of ₹16,97,210. The assessment was later reopened by the Assessing Officer (AO) by issuing a notice dated 30 March 2021 under Section 148 on the ground that the assessee had allegedly made a cash payment of ₹22,50,000 for purchase of land along with other co-purchasers, which was not offered to tax.
In response, the assessee filed a return on 5 January 2022 declaring the same income as originally returned. The AO treated this return as belated and beyond the time stipulated in the notice under Section 148 and therefore treated it as non est. Consequently, the AO completed the reassessment under Section 144 read with Section 147 and Section 144B on 29 March 2022, making an addition of ₹22,50,000.
The assessee challenged both the reassessment and the addition before the first appellate authority, including a specific challenge to the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 on the ground that it was barred by limitation under Section 149. The Commissioner rejected this contention by relying on the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA). It was held that although the normal six-year limitation for AY 2013–14 expired on 31 March 2020, the period fell within the COVID-19 relaxation window under TOLA, which extended the time limit up to 31 March 2021. Since the notice was issued on 30 March 2021, it was held to be within time.
