Amit Kumar Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
AY 2015-16 Reopenings Dead on Arrival: ITAT Surat Quashes All s.148 Notices Post 01.04.2021-TOLA Can’t Revive Time-Barred Years: ITAT Quashes Reopenings for AY 2015-16
The Surat Bench of the ITAT, by a common order dated 31.12.2025, disposed of multiple cross-appeals for AY 2015-16, including Amit Kumar Jain, Hiteshkumar Bhaubhai Ponkia and Vikash Mittal & Sons (HUF), and quashed all reassessment proceedings u/s 147/148 as being barred by limitation.
The reassessments had their genesis in notices issued during the transition period following the Supreme Court ruling in UOI v. Ashish Agrawal, where old-regime notices were deemed to be notices u/s 148A(b). However, applying the later and authoritative ruling of the Supreme Court in UOI v. Rajeev Bansal (2024), the Tribunal noted the categorical concession by the Revenue that for AY 2015-16, any notice issued on or after 01.04.2021 is invalid, as the limitation prescribed u/s 149 had already expired and could not be resurrected by TOLA.
The ITAT also took note of subsequent Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Court decisions (including Deepak Steel & Power Ltd.), consistently holding that AY 2015-16 falls outside the permissible reopening window under the new regime. The Departmental Representative fairly conceded that the issue stood covered against the Revenue.
In view of the settled legal position, the Tribunal held that the very assumption of jurisdiction was bad in law, and therefore all reassessment notices and consequential assessment orders for AY 2015-16 were quashed, without going into the merits of additions. Accordingly, the assessees’ appeals were allowed and the Revenue’s appeals were dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT SURAT
