SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 25707

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH)
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1) MORADABAD MORADABAD – Appellant
Versus
SHIVAADITIYA JEMS AND JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED MORADABAD – Respondent
ITA 4857/DEL/2024[2017-18]



##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

DELHI BENCH, ‘G’: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND

SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.5661& 4857/Del/2024

[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Shivaaditiya Jems and Vs. ITO

Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. Ward- 2 (1)

A-197, Ramganga Vihar, Moradabad

Phase-1, Kanth Road, MDA

Moradabad

PAN No.AASCS6911R

Appellant Respondent

Assessee by Sh. Sourabh Rohtagi, CA

Sh. Rajat Mittal, CA

Revenue by Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT DR

Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 27.10.2025

Date of Pronouncement 31.12.2025

ORDER

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM,

These two appeals are filed by the assessee and revenue

against the orders of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [herein after referred as “CIT(A)”] for the

dated 23.08.2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2. The assessee in its appeal challenged reopening of

assessment and the validity of notice issued u/s.148A of the

Act and the revenue challenge the order of the CIT(A) in

##PAGE2##

deleting the addition made in respect of the addition made

u/s.69C of the Act. Since the assessee has challenged from

validity of notice issued u/s.148 of the Act and the jurisdiction

of AO in framing the assessment, first we take the appeal of

the assessee for adjudication.

3. The assessee in its appeal raised following grounds :-

1 That under the facts and circumstances of the

case both lower authorities erred in law in making and

sustaining addition of Rs.11,75,128/-.

2. That the proceedings U/s.147 /148 are without

jurisdiction and bad in law.

3. That under the facts and circumstances of the

case, reasons to believe had not been recorded prior to

issuance of notice U/s.148.

4. That under the facts and circumstances of the

case, the proceedings are without jurisdiction as no

notice us/. 148A has been issued in terms of Hon’ble

Supreme Court case in case of Ashish Agarwal.

5. That the impugned order is without jurisdiction

and bad in law as not issued interms of Section 151A.

4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that

in the case of the assessee notice dated 31.03.2021 u/s.148 of

the Act was dispatched by speed post on 06.04.2021 as per

the RTI reply dated 20.12.2024 which is placed at page-139 of

the paper book. Referring to page-140 of the paper book

which is the copy of notice dated 31.03.2021 with speed post

acknowledgment which was provided by the Department in

reply to application under RTI by the assessee, the Ld.

Counsel submitted that the counterfoil of the speed post

clearly suggest that the notice u/s. 148 dated 31.03.2021 was

dispatched on 06.04.2021 to the assessee.

Page | 2

##PAGE3##

5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted

notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 was sent through

e-mail on 02.04.2021 and this fact was also confirmed by the

AO vide RTI reply dated 22.09.2025 which is placed at pages

404 and 405 of paper book at para 2 and 3 of RTI reply. The

Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the AO

had confirmed that no notice u/s.148A(b), 148A(d) has been

issued and this fact can be seen from the reply dated

20.12.2024 given by the AO on the RTI application made by

the assessee which is placed at pages -139 of the paper book.

It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that as

per the AO’s own admission and as per the assessment order

notice u/s.148 had been regularized interms of the decision of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal and

therefore, procedure therein needs to be followed. Ld. Counsel

stated that in the case of the assessee since the notice issued

u/s.148 dated 31.03.2021 under old regime has not been

validated by virtue of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in the case of Ashish Agarwa and no notice

u/s.148A(b)/(d) has been issued the assessment framed

pursuant to Section 148 notice is null and void. Ld. Counsel

for the assessee also made brief submissions as under :-

“Notice u/s. 148 dtd. 31.03.2021 (140). As per the RTI

reply dtd 20.12.2024 (139) the notice u/s. 148 dtd.

31.03.2021 (14)) has been dispatched by speed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top