ACIT Vs Yashovardhan Birla (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai: Black Money Act Assessment Fails Once Section 10(1) Notice Is Held Invalid
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissed the Revenue’s appeal and upheld the order of the CIT(A) quashing the assessment framed under section 10(3) of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, for AY 2016-17 in the case of Yashovardhan Birla.
The Tribunal noted that, in the assessee’s own case for the same assessment year, a coordinate bench had already held the foundational notice issued under section 10(1) of the Black Money Act to be invalid. That decision had attained finality as it had not been stayed or reversed by the High Court. Merely because the Revenue’s appeal against that order was pending before the Bombay High Court did not dilute its binding nature.
Since the very assumption of jurisdiction under section 10(1) was struck down, the consequential assessment under section 10(3) could not survive. The CIT(A) was therefore justified in quashing the assessment by following the binding Tribunal order in the assessee’s own case. The Revenue’s attempt to re-agitate issues relating to alleged undisclosed foreign assets, beneficial ownership, and incriminating material was rejected, as those aspects could not override the jurisdictional defect.
Accordingly, the ITAT held that once the notice under section 10(1) of the Black Money Act is invalid, the entire assessment proceedings collapse, and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal in full.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 14.07.2025, passed under section 15 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (“the Black Money Act”), by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2016-17.
