Abhinav Jain v. ITO (2026) 310 Taxman 499 / 488 ITR 255 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Sanction-Non-resident-Notice under section 148 was issued within three years; sanction under section 151 by PCIT was valid-Decision is pending consideration before Supreme Court, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was competent to issue notices under sections 148A/148-[S. 10(4)(ii), 10(14), 10(15)(fa), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 151, 151A, 26AS, Art. 226,]

Assessee-individual maintained a BOI NRE savings account and a PNB savings account but did not file an ITR. Information on the Insight/NMS portal flagged significant transactions during FY 2017-18 (foreign remittance, interest income and time deposits). A notice under section 148A(b) was issued on 22-03-2022 stating that information suggested escapement of income. Assessee replied on 26-03-2022. Two corrigenda dated 31-03-2022 and 01-04-2022 were issued for correcting error of giving only 6 days period to respond by extending time to respond till 02-04-2022. On 07-04-2022, an order under section 148A(d) was passed concluding that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and, with prior approval of PCIT, a notice under section 148 was issued for AY 2018-19. Court held  since the time to file a reply to notice under section 148A(b) stood extended till 02-04-2022 by corrigendum, by application of the third proviso to section 149(1), the time allowed to assessee to file a reply (eleven days) had to be excluded and, as such, the order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 issued on 7-4-2022 were within limitation. Further, since notice under section 148 was issued within three years, sanction under section 151 by PCIT was valid.Petitioner argued that after section 151A and e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, only a faceless unit could issue notices under sections 148A/148-Whether since in T.K.S. Builders (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2024] 167 taxmann.com 759/469 ITR 657 (Delhi), it has been clearly held that both officers shall be competent to issue notice, which decision is pending consideration before Supreme Court, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was competent to issue notices under sections 148A/148. Assessee, a non-resident individual living in Dubai, did not file ITR for the relevant year. He maintained an NRE account with BOI and a savings account with PNB. Insight portal verification was triggered due to non-filing; the AO issued a section 148A(b) notice relying on NMS/Insight transactions aggregating about Rs. 9.29 crores. Assessee replied that Rs. 8.50 crores were received from his father into his NRE account and interest on NRE deposits was exempt under Section 10(4)(ii)/Section 10(15)(fa) and had furnished bank statements, Form 26AS, his passport and UAE residence permit.AO passed an order under section 148A(d) initiating reassessment and issued a notice under section 148. On writ, the Court held that since the assessee had not produced any RBI permission or other documentation under FEMA establishing eligibility to maintain an NRE account and claim exemption, the issue of whether necessary permissions were obtained from RBI for the assessee to open an NRE account would decide the aspect of reassessment of income, and these aspects shall be looked into by the AO. The reassessment notice is held to be valid.  Notification No. 18/2022, dated 29-03-2022.  (AY. 2018-19)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*