IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3553/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3)

513, 5^th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai - 400020 …………. Appellant Ramchand Thakurdas Jhamtani Gala No. 120, Rajlaxmi Complex, Q Building, Backside Kalher, Bhiwandi, Vs Thane – 400203.

[PAN: AAEPJ8492K] …………. Respondent C. O. No. 227/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Ramchand Thakurdas Jhamtani Gala No. 120, Rajlaxmi Complex, Q Building, Backside Kalher, Bhiwandi, Thane – 400203.

[PAN: AAEPJ8492K] …………. Appellant Additional Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3) Vs

513, 5th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai - 400020 …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Dharan Gandhi For the Respondent/Department : Shri R. R. Makwana Date Conclusion of hearing : 12.02.2025 Pronouncement of order : 28.02.2025

O R D E R

Per Bench:

1. The present appeal and cross objection pertain to Assessment Year 2014-2015. The Revenue has preferred appeal against the order, dated 16/05/2024, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Delhi, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had disposed off the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 26/05/2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act, for the Assessment Year 2014-2015. The Assessee has filed cross objection.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that notice under Section 148 of the Act (old regime) was issued to the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2014-2015 on 07/06/2021 (i.e., after the expiry of 4 years but before the expiry of 6 years from the end of Assessment Year 2014-2015). Subsequently, in compliance with the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal 444 ITR 1 (SC) [04/05/2022], communication, dated 25/05/2022, was sent to the Assessee intimating that the aforesaid notice issued under Section 148 of the Act (under old regime) would be treated as the show-cause notice issued in terms of Section 148A(b) of the Act (under new regime introduced by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01/04/2021). The Assessing Officer also shared with the Assessee material/information on the basis of which the Assessing Officer had formed a belief that income had escaped assessment. The Assessee filed reply on 09/06/2022. Thereafter, order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was passed on 24/07/2022 after taking approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai. This was followed by issuance of notice on 24/07/2022 under Section 148 of the Act (new regime). The reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of the Assessment Order, dated 26/05/2023, passed under section 147 read with Section

144B of the Act. The appeal preferred by the Assessee against the aforesaid Assessment Order was allowed by the CIT(A) vide Order, dated 16/05/2024. Being aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal challenging the relief granted by the CIT(A), while the Revenue has filed cross- objection challenging the validity of the re-assessment proceedings.

3. We would first take up cross-objection filed by the Assessee raising jurisdictional issue. The cross objection raised by the Assessee read as under:

“1. The notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 24.07.2022 is bad in law. The Ld. AO has not fulfilled the jurisdictional requirements of section 147 to 151 of the Act.”

4. We have heard both the sides and have perused the material on record in relation to this issue. We have also taken into consideration the judicial precedents cited during the course of hearing.

5. There is no dispute as to facts. It is admitted position that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act (old regime) on 24/07/2022, was treated as notice issued u