Vinod Shyamsunder Pasari Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
The Mumbai ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings for AY 2015-16 holding that the notice issued u/s 148 on 31.07.2022 was barred by limitation under section 149. The Tribunal noted that though the original notice dated 21.06.2021 was treated as a deemed notice u/s 148A(b) pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling in Ashish Agrawal, the fresh notice issued on 31.07.2022 could not survive since for AY 2015-16 the limitation had already expired on 31.03.2022.
The Tribunal heavily relied upon the Revenue’s own concession recorded by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal that for AY 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 were liable to be dropped as TOLA extension was not applicable. Relying on Delhi High Court rulings in Pratishtha Garg and IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd., along with earlier Mumbai Tribunal decisions, the ITAT held that the reassessment notice itself was invalid and consequently quashed the entire assessment framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B.
The Tribunal also noted that the Supreme Court in Nehal Ashit Shah and Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. had approved similar quashing of AY 2015-16 reassessment proceedings. Since the reassessment itself was annulled on jurisdictional grounds, the merits of the additions were treated as academic and the Revenue’s appeal became infructuous.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
The present cross-appeals have been filed by the assessee and the Revenue against the impugned order dated 11/09/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2015-16.
