CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT L V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1) NEW DELHI & ORS.

W.P.(C)/4473/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Capgemini Technology Services India Limited, which, as a successor in interest to Aricent Technologies Pvt Ltd, challenged the reassessment action initiated by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary contention was the timeliness of the reassessment notice under the new regime, specifically whether it was issued within the permissible period. The court referenced several precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, to guide the evaluation of the surviving period for issuing reassessment notices. The court's decision directs a detailed examination of each notice's compliance with procedural and substantive legal standards as established in previous judgments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 747037 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Anr., Kanwaljeet Kaur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, T.K.S. Builders, Abhinav Jindal and Naveen Kumar Gupta
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, TOLA
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: INDRUJ RAI; SANJEEV MENON; RAHUL SINGH; ANMOL JAGGA; GAURAV KUMAR; VARSHA SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: NEERAJ JAIN; ANIKET AGRAWAL; SAKSHAM SINGHAL
• Keywords: Deemed SCN; Limitation; Reassessment; Surviving period; Time barred
• Section: 148; 153C; 149; 151; 148A(b); 148A(d)

Judgement Text

"$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4473/2023 CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD) .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj Jain, Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Mr. Saksham Singhal, Advs. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1) NEW DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon and Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs and Mr Anmol Jagga, Mr. Gaurav Kumar and Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R % 20.02.2025 1. The instant writ petition had been preferred assailing the reassessment action initiated by the respondent pertaining to Assessment Year [‘AY’] 2017-18. We take note of the principal challenge which now remains and pertains to the issue of surviving period. 2. The petitioner, in order to buttress its claim of the proceedings being time barred, has placed for our consideration the following chart: This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/03/2025 at 14:55:20 “SUMMARY CHART A. Key Facts: Sl. No. PARTICULARS DATE Relevant Pg./Ann No. 1. Notice issued Section 148 (old regime) 30.06.2021 ‘A’ / 89 2. Letter communicating information pursuant to Ashish Agarwal (SC) – reply to be filed by 08.06.2022 24.05.2022 ‘B’ / 90-91 3. Reply filed by the Petitioner 07.06.2022 ‘N’ / 244-257 4. Order u/s 148A(d) 29.07.2022 ‘C’ / 97-102 5. Notice issued u/s 148 – Sanction from Pr. CIT 29.07.2022 ‘D’ / 103-105 B. COMPUTATION OF LIMITATION AS PER DECISION OF UOI VS. RAJEEV BANSAL S. No. SC Paras 1. Assessment Year 2017-18 2. Period of limitation u/s 149 [3 years or 6 years] 3 years 3. Original Period of limitation u/s 149 31.03.2021 4. Extended period of limitation as per IT Act read with TOLA 30.06.2021 Paras 65-69 5. Date of original notice u/s 148-deemed SCN u/s 148A(b) 30.06.2021 6. Time surviving from date of issuance of deemed SCN till expiry of period as extended by TOLA [from 30.06.2021 till 30.06.2021] 0 days Para 109-113 7. Extended to 7 days as per fourth proviso [as then existing] to section 149 7 days 8. Period of deemed stay as per Rajeev Bansal (SC), i.e., the date of original 148 notice till the date on which reply filed by assessee 30.06.2021 to 08.06.2021 Para 105- 107 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/03/2025 at 14:55:20 9. Remaining period 7 days Paras 109- 113 10. Last date for issuing notice u/s 148 [i.e., 08.06.2022 + 7 days] 15.06.2022 11. Actual date of issuance of notice u/s 148 29.07.2022 Notice u/s 148 issued under new regime was outside limitation 3. The said question would have to be necessarily examined by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer bearing in mind the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693] as well as of this Court in Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Anr. [2025 SCC OnLine Del 481]. 4. Dealing with identical issues, we had disposed of a batch of writ petitions by our judgment rendered in Kanwaljeet Kaur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2025 SCC OnLine Del 605] in the following terms: “27. We accordingly dispose of this batch of writ petitions by directing the concerned AOs to evaluate the individual SCNs' under Section 148 of the Act bearing in mind our judgments in T.K.S. Builders, Abhinav Jindal and Naveen Kumar Gupta. These decisions have conclusively settled issues pertaining to the accordal of sanction under Section 151 as well as the authority of the jurisdictional AO to commence and undertake reassessment. Those decisions also lay at rest the challenge which the writ petitioners had raised that an AO is bound to adhere to the procedure prescribed by Section 153C in cases emanating from a search. 28. A similar exercise would have to be undertaken to examine the issue of surviving period in respect of each individual noticee under Section 148 and which would necessarily be guided by the judgments of Rajeev Bansal and Ram Balram. 29. The concerned AOs shall consequently pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the impact of the judgments referred to above upon the impugned reassessment notices and in the manner indicated in paras 27 and 28 of this order. That decision shall thus This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/03/2025 at 14:55:20 render a finding on whether the impugned reassessment notices would survive or be liable to be recalled. It shall be open to the writ petitioners to assail any adverse orders that may come to be passed pursuant to the above in accordance with law.” 5. Consequently, and in light of the above, we dispose of the writ petition on terms identical to those provided in paragraphs 27 to 29 of Kanwaljeet Kaur. YASHWANT VARMA, J. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. FEBRUARY 20, 2025/akc This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/03/2025 at 14:55:20 "