Shreyansh Mehta S/o Shri Shanti Lal Mehta Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court)
The Rajasthan High Court has directed the Income Tax Officer (ITO) to consider the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 while proceeding with a case involving Shreyansh Mehta.
Mehta’s counsel argued that the limitation period for Assessment Year 2015-16 had expired. He highlighted that in the Rajeev Bansal case, the Union of India conceded to dropping proceedings for AY 2015-16 when the limitation period had elapsed. Mehta’s notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued on July 27, 2022, reportedly after this period.
Counsel for the Income Tax Department did not refute these submissions. The Court, therefore, disposed of the petition, instructing the Assessing Officer to decide the proceedings in accordance with law, specifically considering the Rajeev Bansal precedent and the department’s concessions made in that case regarding notices exceeding the limitation period for AY 2015-16.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
1. At the outset, Mr. Siddharth Ranka, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the precedent law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Union of India & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal reported in (2024) 469 ITR 46.
