A notice issued under the relevant section of the tax law on or after the commencement of the new reassessment regime is valid only if it strictly follows the mandatory inquiry and procedural requirements established by the new statutory provisions. Non-compliance with these procedural conditions renders the assessment proceedings void ab initio.

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by order of first appeal dated 05.06.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 27.03.2022 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the assessee has filed this appeal.

The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed her return of income of AY 2014-15 declaring a total income of Rs. 10,95,540/- u/s 139 which was duly assessed. Subsequently, on the basis of information in his possession about certain financial transactions undertaken by assessee, the AO re-opened assessee’s case u/s 147 through a notice dated 31.03.2021 u/s 148 which culminated into impugned assessment-order dated 27.03.2022 at a total income of Rs. 1,95,59,200/- inclusive of an addition of Rs. 1,84,63,660/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE made by AO to the returned income of assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal but did not get success. Now, the assessee has come in next appeal before us.

The assessee has raised several grounds in Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo). Further, the assessee moved an application under Rule 11 of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 raising following additional grounds:

“a) That the impugned notice, though dated 31/03/2021, under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2014-15, was actually issued/served only on 01/04/2021 via email. As such, the notice is barred by limitation under the first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Further, the proceedings were initiated without complying with the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 148A of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned notice and consequential Re-Assessment Order are liable to be quashed.

b) That the learned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the National Faceless Assessment Centre have erred in failing to comply with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (supra) under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, rendering the re-assessment proceedings legally untenable.

c) That in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022 SCC Online SC 543), it was mandatory for the Revenue to follow the procedure under Section 148A of the Act before issuing any notice under Section 148 in cases where proceedings are initiated after the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021, and failure to do so renders the impugned notice and proceedings without jurisdiction and bad in law.”

Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the additional grounds are legal in nature; go to the root of the matter; do not call for any new evidence; and can be decided on the basis of material already held on record. Therefore, in view of the decision in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC), these grounds are admissible. Ld. DR for revenue could not controvert these submissions of Ld. AR. Therefore, the additional grounds are admitted and taken for adjudication.

Since the additional grounds challenge the foundational point i.e. the legality of assessment framed by AO, we first proceed to adjudicate these grounds.

Ld. AR for assessee drew us to the orders of lower-authorities and documents held in Paper-Book filed by assessee and submitted that the AO issued notice u/s 148 bearing DIN & Dated 31.03.2021 but the same was actually dispatched by way of email to assessee on 01.04.2021 at about 08:31 A.M. In support of his submission, Ld. AR referred screenshot of e-mail received by assessee from the office of AO, placed at Page No. 2 of Paper-Book. This way, Ld. AR at first demonstrated that the notice u/s 148, though dated 31.03.2021, was issued to assessee on 01.04.2021.

Ld. AR next submitted that he is not claiming that the notice issued by A