AI Insights
The case involves a series of writ petitions filed by various petitioners challenging the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reassessment of income. The primary contention was that the notices were issued beyond the statutory period, thus violating the provisions of the Act. The respondents, including the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Central Board of Direct Taxes, defended the notices, arguing that the issuance and dispatch were within the legal framework. However, the court found discrepancies in the dates of issuance and dispatch of the notices, leading to the conclusion that they were issued beyond the permissible period. The court's decision was heavily influenced by the Supreme Court's judgment in Ashish Agarwal vs. Union of India, which clarified the legal position regarding the issuance of notices under Section 148 post the amendment by the Finance Act, 2021.
Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 764413 (HC-TELANGANA)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
CRN Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Others
Pronouncement Date
14-06-2024
Assessment Year
misc
Judgement Text
"12313379 | HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION Nos.18098, 14302,14331,19083, 20301, 20925. I 20935.21181,21 805, 21949 AND 22543 0F 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 18098 0F 2022 Between: KalvanChillara,s/o.KotaiahNaidu'agedabout63years,RJo'PIotNo.31B,H.No il':S;i i;; Nil;yam, Road No 5, Jubiiee Hills, Hvderabad - 500033' ...PETITIONER AND 1 . Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Crrcle-1(3)' Hyderabad 2. The Central Board of Direct 13xs5, De:|artment of Revenue' Ministry^of - ii;;\";;: -Govt,'- ot lndla, Secretariat Buildings' New Delhi - 110001 ' RePresented bY its Chairman' 3. The Union of lndia, Ministry of Ftnance'.Central Secretariat' North Block' New Delhi-1'10001 Represented by rts secrelary' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction' more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, by declaring the impugned Assessment order u/s 143(3) ( .w 's, 147 dl. 29,03.2022 passed by the 1 St respondent vide Document ldentificationNo(DlN)ITBA/AST/S/1471?Q?1-2?11O41933665(1)dl?903?O??' without followinq the 'lue procedure of Law. as vor(i. illeqal :rnir i:ontrary to the provisions of nconte-lax Act and ultftr vrrr:s thc ConstrtLrtion of lrriir._r. Petition under Section 151 cpc prayrng that in the circr jrnstances stated in the a{fidavit filcd in support of the petitron, the High court may be pleased to suspend th€ oper.rtion of the impugned Assessment order c1r. 2g.o3.2022 passed unde,r serction i143(3) t.w.s. 147 of the Act vide Dor;un.rent ldentification No. (Dl N ) I TIIA/AST/S/1 4 7 t2O21 -22t 1 O41 933665 ( 1 ). IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between 1 Depuiy cornnr issioner. of Income Tax, cerrtrar circre-1(3 Aayakar Bhavan, Bashr:er Baqh Hyderabad - 500004. 2. central Boarci of Drrect. Tales, Deparlment o[ Reve.ue, rrrrinistry of Finance, Govt of lndia Secretariat Buildings, New Derhi - 11000i n\"piut*tei 6v'it\" Ch airma n. AND 1. Kalyan Chi|ara,S/o. Kotaiah Naidu, R/o. plot No.31B, H.No. G1, Sri Hari Nilayam, Roacl No. 5, Jubilee Hills, Hyilerabad _ 500033. ...RESpONDENT No.1/pETtTtONER 2. Union of lndia. r lr,4ini5try. of .Finance, Central Secretariat, North Block, New Deil-i-l10001 nepreseitet by ;t!.5;;;;:' \" ...RESpoNDENT/RESpONDENT No.3 Petition unde:r Section '15'l cpc praying that in the cr.cumstances slated in the affiriavit fircrl in'support of the petitiorl, the High court rray be preased to vacate the intr:rinr order dated 1.1 .O4.2022 in l.A. No. 1 of 202!2 in W p No.1g098 of 2022 and disrnrss the present writ petition in w.p. No. rB0gB of 2022 wi*t costs. Counset for the petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counset for the Respond\":l!9:, i & 2: SRt J.V. PRASAD, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX Counset for the Respondent N_o.3: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTTNG SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DE;ijil;;i18,.,o* o.*.*AL oF INDIA lA NO: 1 OF itl22 WRIT PETITION NO: 14302 OF 2022 Between: Anja Reddy N/iuddam, # 16-1-398, Recldy Street, Saidabad Hyderabad, Telangana- 500059 ...PETITIONER AND 1 . The lncome'lTax Officer, Ward 1 3(3), Aayakar Bhawan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500004. 2. The Central iBoard of Direct Taxes' Department of Revenue, N'4inistry-of - Fininie, Govt. of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1 10001 ' Represented bY its Chairman. 3. The Union of lndia, IVlinistry of Finance, Central Secretariat, North Block, New Dethi-1 10001 . Represented by its Secretary' 4.TheAdditional/JoinUDeputy/ASsiStantComtnissioneroflncomeTax/ tncome Tai Ofticer, Natibndl Faceless Asscssmenl Cenlre Delhi, llcome Tax Deoartment, Ministry ol Financc. Room No 401. 2\"\" Floor' t-Ramp' Jawahailal Nehru Stadium. Delhr I 10003' ResoondentNo.4isimpleadedasperCourtOrderdated:1608'2023Vide l.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.14302 of .202? ,.RESPONDENTS Petrtion under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances statedil in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of tVlandamus, declaring the Assessment order in DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/147l 2021-2211042104667(1 ), d1.30.03.2022, passed, by the 4rr' respondent herein without following the due procedure of Law, as' void' rllegal and contrary lo the provisionsoflncome.taxACtandultravirestheConstitutionoflndia,and consequently set aside the same wherever it occurs' (PrayerisamendedaSperCourtorderdatedl6.0B.2023Videl.A'No'4of2022in W.P.No.14302 of 2022) lA NO: 1 OF 2022 PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspendthereassessmentproceedingsinitiatedbyissuingnoticeU/S148ofthe Act vide Docrment lcientrfication No (DlN) trBA/AST/s/1 4 tJt2o2.1-)2l.o3z12ooo4 (1) dt 31 03',,.02., . lA NO: 3 OF 2022 Pe tition undcr Siection 151 CPC prayinq that in the circun,stances stated in the affidavit frlecl in support of the petition, the High court nray be preased to suspend the Ass.ssment order in DrN No rrBA/Asrr/s/1 47rzo2i_22t 104210466711 ) dt. _r0.03.2022 passed pursuant to reassessrrent proceedings initiated u/s l4B of tl'o Act vide DtN No. trBA/AST/ st148t2o21 ,)_2t 10321zooo4(1) Dt'31 03.2021 and nlay pass such other order(s) as the Hon ble court deems fit and proper irr the intr:rests of substantiar .lustice, as otherwise ti)e petitioner wourd be put to irrepairable loss and severe injury. WRIT PETITION NO: 1 4331 0F 2022 (Prayer is arrendcd i;s per Court Order dated 16.Og.2023 Vide l.A W.P.No.143,12 of 2022) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI J.V. PRASAD, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX counsel for the Respondent No.3 & 4: sRr B. MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTTNG SRI C;ADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDiA No.4 of 2022 in Between: Man .lVohar r Agarw;.t HUF S/o. Satyanarayana Agarwal. aged aoout 60 years, 5_5_ 10811, Pan 3azar, R:rnigunj, Secuncieraba,i, nep 6v Xi.tu AND 1 The lnconrc 'fax Officer, Ward 500c 04 ..PETITIONER 10(1 ), lT Tower, AC (,;1r3165, Hyderabad- lvlinistry of - 110001 2 The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of R(jvenue, Fina rce. Gr, 11. o1 lndia, Secretariat guiidingr, Nerr. Delhi Repr esented hy its Chairman. The Union of India. Ministrv of Finance. Central Secretari.t, No(h Block, New Delhi- 1 1 00o 1 Represented Oy its Sciietaiy 4 The Adcirtron;rllJoinuDeoutv/Assrstant, commissioner ot rncome Tax/rncome Tax Offrce r National facetess' nis\"*r,\"ri\"'C-\"rtr!, o\"lt.,i, lncome_Tax -) Depa.rtment. I rlir-ristry of I Jawaharlar ru\"riiir'siJai,Li, .d:ili:\"i,,f,?.'n No 401, 2*i I X\",iB\"i 3F ?b|r\" ; i,ii fl,$:\" ? i : g f i,,,2,,3 1,, n o rd e r d a re d Fioor, E_Ramp, 16.08.2023 Vide ...RESPONDENTS petition under Article 226 of the Constitutior circumstances statedirin the affidavit fired therewi of rndia praying that in the pteased ro issue a writ, order or direcrion, ,,.- orjlr,tj*::J flT\"l:::; Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order 2o2 1 -22/ 1 o42 1 o 4B2o (1 ), dt.30. 03.2022, pa ssed by,,.:; :;:\":t: ::: :::, ^:, the Assessment year r201 void, iiresa, and conrrary ,:;: ;::l:j: :l;::\":: due procedure or Law, as :-tax Act and ultra vires the constitution of rndia' and consequentry set aside the same wherever it occurs. [,i;\"il'\":[5ITl1|fff., courr order dared 16.08.20 23 vider.A.No.2 or 2022 in IA NO: 10F 2022 Petition under Section 151 C the affrdavit filed in support of the suspend the reassessment proceed Act vide Document ldentification No (1) dt.31 .0s.2021 . PC praying that in the circumstances stated in petition, the High Court may be pleased to ings initiated by issuing notice u/s 14g of the (Dt N) trBA/A Sr t st 1 48 I 2021 _22t 1 032006347 lA NO: 3 oF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased t-022 issued by Respondent No.2. 2 lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praylng that in the clrcurlrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the Hiqh Court may bc plcased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certificd copy of thc lmpugned Assessment Order bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14712021-2211042258851 (1 ) dated 18 January 2022 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 147 of the lncome Tax Act, .1 961 . Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certifred copy of the lmpugned S. 148 Notice bearing DIN and Notice No ITBA/AST/S/1 4 Bl2o2o- 2111032099275(1) dated 31 March 2021 issued by Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 . lA NO: 3 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certrfied copy of the lmpugned Demand Notice bearing DIN iand Notice No ITBA/AST/S/1 5612021-2211042259009(1 ) dated 3'l lttlarch 2022 issued by Respondent No.1 issued under Section 156 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961. lA NO: 4 OF 2022 Petition under Section -151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the ce(ified copy of the lmpugned S.148 Order bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/F/1 712021-2211040464069(1 ) dated 08 March 2022 issued by Respondent No.2. lA NO: 5 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct '.i.; :i. lA NO: 2 OF 2022 ts the Respondent Nos-1 and 2 not to take any further stcl)s in relatron to proceedings pursu.rnt to the lmpugned Demand Noticc bearrnc DIN & Notice No. ITBA/AST/S| 1 5612021-2211042259009( 1 ) dated 31 March 2A22 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 156 of the lncome Tax Act, 196 l. lA NO: 6 OF 2022 Petrtron under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit frled in support of the petition, the High Court nray le pleased to stay the lmpugned Assessment Order bearinq DIN No. ITBA'AST/S/14 712021- 2211042258851(1) dated 18 January 2022 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 147 of lhe lncome Tax Act, 196'1 pending disposal of the Writ Petttron. lA NO: 7 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit f led in support of the petition, the High Court nray br: pleased to Stay the Impugned Demand Notice bearing DIN and Notice No. ITBA,/AST/S/15 612021- 2211042259009(1) dated 31 March 2022 issued by Responrlent No.1 under Section 156 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 pending disposal of this Petitron. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between: .i . lncome Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centr(.. Government of lndia, tr,4inistry of Finance, New Delhi. 2- lncome Tax Offrcer, Exemption Ward 1(1), Aaykar Bhaw,rn, Opposite LB Stadiunr, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad-500 004. ....PETITIONERSiRESPONDENTS 1 & 2 AND 1 Consortium of lnstitutions of Higher Learning, Survey No. ll5, lllT Campus, Gachibowli, Hyderabad-500032, Represented by tr4r. [t4 Venkateswarlu, Director ...RESPONDENT No.1/PETITIONER 2. Union of lndia. Through the Secretary, Department of Revr:nue, lVinistry of Finance, Room No- 128A, North Block, New Delhi -110001 . ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT No.3 l9 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated rn the affidavit frled in suppo( of the petition, the High Court nray be pleased to vacate the order dated 28.04.2022 in W.P No.21949 of 2022 by staying the operation of the impugned proceedings and to dismiss the present Writ Petition with cost. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. VIVEK REDDY, REPRESENTING rI SRI CUDDAPAH NANDAGOPAL Counsel for the Respbndent Nos. 1 & 2: SRI K. RAJI REDDY, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT I Counsel for the Respbndent No.3: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTING SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA WRIT PETITION NO: 22543 OF 2022 Between: Consortium of lnstitutions of Higher Learning, Survey No. 25, lllT Campus, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500 032, Represented by Mr. tvl. Venkateswarlu, Director ..PETITIONER AND 1 lncome Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessnrent Centre, Government of lndia, Ministry of,Finance, New Delhi. lncome Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Opposite LB Stadium, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad, Telangana- 500 004. Union of lndia, rThrough the Secretary, Department of Revenue, l ,4inistry of Finance, Room No. 128A, North Block, New Delht - 110001 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 o{ the Constitution o[ lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, thc High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Direction or Order, particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and Certiorari, a. Quashing and setting aside the lmpugned Assessment Order bearrng DIN No. ITBA/AST/SI 1 47 12021 -221 1 04226A 1 O8(1 ) dated 3 1 t ,4arch 2022 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 147 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961; 2 .1 l b. Quashing and sctting aside the lrnpugned Demand Notic:e bearing DIN and Notict: No. IIBA/AST/S/1 5612021 -221 1 042260251 (1 ) riatr:d 3'1 March 2OZZ issued by Respondent No.1 issuecl under Section 156 lrf the lncome Tax Act, '1 961 , c. Quashing and setting aside the lmpugned S. 148 Noticr bearing DIN and Noticer No ITBAiAST/S/1 4812020-21 I 1 032099352(1 ) datr,d 31 March 2021 issuecl by Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, d. Quashrrrg and setting aside the subsequent lmpugned S.- 48 Order bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/F/1 712021-2211040463903(1) dated OB tttarch Z02Z issued by Respondent No.2. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petitior-r under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circun.stances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court miry be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certified copy of the rmpugned S. 148 Notice bearing DIN &,Notice No. |TBAJASTlsll4S|2O2O-21/1032099352(1) dated 31 March 2021 issued by Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 lA NO: 2 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circum:;tances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing lhe certified copy of the mpugned S.148 Order bearingl DIN No. ITBA/AST/F/1 712021-2211040463S03( 1 ) Cated 08 I /arch 2022 issued by Despondent No.2. lA NO: 3 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mav be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certified copy of the lmpugned Assessment Order bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14712021-2? 110422601 0B( 1 ) ll dated 31 ltAarch 2O22 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 147 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, IA NO: 4 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the requirement of filing the certified copy of the lmpugned Assessment Order bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14712021-2211042260108( 1 ) dated 31 l Aarch 2022.11 lA NO: 5 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to take any fudher steps in relation to proceedings pursuantlto the lmpugned Demand Notice bearing DIN & Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/15612021,2211042260251(1) dated 31 March 2022 issued by Respondent No.1 issJed under Section 156 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. lA NO: 6 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the lmpugned Demanid Notice bearing DIN & Notice No. ITBA/AST/ 5t15612021- 2211042260251(1 ) dated 31 March 2022 issued by Respondent No.'l issued under Section 156 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 pending disposal of thrs Petition lA NO:7 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay the lmpugned Assessment Order bearritrg DIN No ITBA/AST/S/14712021- t: 22110422601O8( 1) dated 31 l!4arch 2022 issued by Resporrdent No.1 under Section 147 of l\"rr: Income Tax Act, 1961 pendinq disposal of thc Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between: 1. lnconre I ax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Government of lndia, l 4inistry of Finance, New Delhi. 2. lncome T:lx Officer, Exemption Ward 1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Opposite LB Stadium, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 AND 1 Consortium of lnstitutions of Higher Learning, Survey No.25, lllT Campus, Gachrbowh, Hyderabad - 500 032, Represented by i: Director lr.4r. lV. Venkateswarlu. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2. Union of lndia,,Through the Secretary, Department of Rt:venue, Ministrv of Finance, Room No. 128A, North Block, New Delhi - 110001 ...RESPONDENTS Petitron under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court nray be pleased to vacate the order dated 28.04.2022 in W P. 22543 of 2022 staying the operation of the impugned proceedings and to dismiss the present Writ Petiti,rn with cost. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. VIVEK REDDY, REPRESENTING SRI CUDDAPAH NANDA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: SRI K. RAJI REDDY, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTING SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER Pagc 3 ol 29 t,st.,l & i 't R.l I lllr')S .lr)ll. l)r1( h THE HOI,TOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY 1 I i N AND THE HO OURABLE SRI JUSTICE N, TUKARAMJI Writ Petition N 18098 14302 14331 19083 20301 20925 \"L 20935, 2!18L,21805, 21949 arrd 22543 of 2022 COMMON ORDER I I, I b lr I (Per the Horible Sri Ju.slr( c P SarL Kosltg) IS Constitution oI India challenglng the issuauce under Article 226 of atch the i these batch of writ ipetitions is the objection of, the notice being barred The instant of writ petitions hled by the pctitioners I of notice uncler Sbction 148 of the Income Tax Act, 196 I by the ,i respondent-Departilent. Though tl-rc challenge in all these writ I petitions are on valious grounds, both on maintainability as also on i the merits, howevei one preliminary objection which runs through al1 by limitation und short, 'the Act'f 2. In all these w notice and initiating proceedings uncler Section 148 of the Act was coming to an end on 31.03.202 1. In majority of the cases, the notice under challenge iri the instant writ petitions is dated 31 .O3.2O21 , however the been issued from the office of the the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for ht petitions, admittedly the last date for ser-vice of i notibes r have I I respondcnt- Departinent either on Ol.O4.'2021 or on subsequent dates i l'rrrl' 4 ol 29 This is 1.he bonr: ol .ontention ,lsi reg issued itself r>r-r or alter O1.O1 .2021 rvoulcl l,r l{J ct N]-RJ ii l!r '))i lo22&l),|1clr arcls r.vhethe 11 he r Lotice which is 1he grounds of limitation. Sin<:e thc issr-rc is cornmon in all be {hit tnL*\" on wri I Court is not re ti:rnnq to thc acluzrl datcs in each o 3. He ard NIr.Drrrrclu Manmohan W.P.Nos. 18098, 14ii02, 14331. 20301 and t petitions, this e notrces. ol 2022; Mr.Y. letltioners in Basha, learned Nar.A.V.A. Siva f'th I IF I lcarned counsll for petitioners in ^o0.,^.,r* , {ro. r.Shaik .leefni 21 181 Ratnakar, learr-recl Senior Cortnsel, W.P.Nos.2092.5 anetitioners in I W.P.Nos.2l919 &,2'2.43 of 2022. ar.rd Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Senior I Standing Counsei ftrr Income Tax. fbr the respondents. 4 The real issuc lo bc clecidccl is rr.thether it was 1 proper on thc part of respondents in mere pre tion of the notice legal , justified and under Scction 148 ol the Act orr 3 1.03.2O2 1 and rwar ll'l{)9S l(l2l&l)rt( h us and which clea-rly indicate that thc notices have been issued in all these writ petrtions ( not served ) itself on 01.04.202 1 or on a later l I date. The questioniof servlce of thesc notices and the date of service of lr t: notices upon the petitioners is of no r-lcvaitce or consequence in all Lr tt these writ petitionS, as the notices itself have been dispatched from the office of the I.T. I Def artment on or before O1.04.2021 which itself is beyond the period fli m1tation LIl L7. It is relevant at this juncture to note that upon coming into force of the Finance Ac 2021, certain amenclments were brought to the Income Tax Act, wherein Section 148 stood substituted with I t t96r Section 14BA bY e Finance Act, 2O27 w.e.f. 01.04.2027. In the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) w ich has also been lbllowed by practically every High Court in the count , held that for anY notice oI re assessment on or after Ol.O4.2O2l il wJuld be the new amcnded law which would be l asl the un-amendecl provisions were valid only tili I' governing the {ieldl 31.O3.2021 18. We leave that issue for the time being there itself. 19. It is necessary at this juncture to refer to the decision of the I t l Madras High Cour iulthe case of Smt. Parveen Arnin Bhathara vs. I I I th Plt't'. 12 ctl 29 I'SI(.I & N'I'RJ l, Il.j(r,18 2o2lc barch Income-Tax OfficerT, whcrcin the learned Divisron Bench at paragraph No.12, after rleeLling lvitl'r certain judicial precedents on the issue, has hcld as unclcr, 1 '12022) 446 L',t'.R. 201 ( lad) vlz \"12 148 in relotion to ossessment yeor 2003-04, Thus, the expression 'to tssue' in the context of issuonce of notices, writs ond process, hos been ottributed the, meaninq, to send out; to ploce in the honds ol the proper officer fort service. The i expression \"sholl be issued\" os used in section 149 would. t erefore rl hove to be reod in the ot'oresoid context. ln thelpresent cose, the I impugned notices hove been signed on 31.03.201o,lwhereos the some I were sent to the speed post centre for booking oqly on 07.()4.2o1o. I Considering the definition of the word issue, it is opporeit that merely signing lhe noli(es on 31.03.2010, connot be equatedlwith ssuonce I of notice os contemploted under Section 149 oJ the Act. The dote of I issue would be the dote on which the some were honded over for I service to thc proper ot'ficer which in the facts ol th{present cose would be the dote on which the soid notices were ocyuollV honded over to the post office for the purpose of booking for the purpose of et'fectinll service on the petitioners. Till the pointlof time the envelopes ore properly stomped with odequote volue o,F postol I stomps, it connot be stoted thot the process of issue is comolete. ln the Jocts of the present cose, the impugned notices hoJ,ing br:en sent for booking to the speed post centre only on 07.0 issue of the soid notices https://www.mhc.tn.go 07.04.2010 and not 31.0i.?010, os contended revenue. ln the circumstonces, impugned the no 4.2070, thr dote of r.l vttn/lldts r ould be I 'pn ibehou oJ the il ticest'under Section 't ino been issued on ,-| ,'l rri I 'i rl hov I i I i I I I 07.04.2010, w Pzrgc 13 of 29 l)sL,l & 1'R,,1 Lr l8lrl8 .lollNl)xrLh hich is cleorly beyond the period of six yeors t'rom the l end of the relevont ossessment yeor, are cleorly borred by limitotion and os such, connot be sustoined.\" Thus, lit isl opporent t'rom the oforesaid decisions thdt the issuonce oJ notice under section 149 is complete only when the some I is issued in tlle monner os prescribed under section 282 r/w rule 127 ol the lncomte,Tdx Rules prescribing the mode of service of notice under the Aci,,,The signing of notice would not omount to issuonce of ll notice os contemploted under section 149 of the Act. ln other words, the requirembnt d7 ittrrnr\" of notice under section 149 is not mere l signing of thb no;tice under section 148, but is sent to the proper i person withinlthe end of the relevont ossessment yeor.\" I, I 2C . Similar stand has also been tarken by a Division Bench of the Iti Allahabad High Coirrt ,in the case of Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of, India and otherss. The Division Bench, while dealing with the prSvisions of the Inlbrmatron Technology Act, 20O0 at paragraph Nos.1B, 9 and 20, held as ur.rcler, viz. , \"18. Sidce Section 149 of the Act 196L requires notice to be I issued by lncdme iox Authority, therefore, in terms of sub Section (1) of Section 282 A it hos to be signed by thot outhority ond to be issued i in poper formlor communicoted in electronic form by thot outhority in Ill occordonce with pirocedu re prescribed i D. The communicotion in electronic form hos been prescribed in Rttle 727 A of the Rules '1962 which provides o procedure for issuance of 'every notice or other document ond the e-moil in l l '1zozz1 +++ I T.R.41 (Allr) Prrrlr' 14 ol 29 clectrontc forrn/electronic ntoil which hos to be issued fi tn the l, r .1 c N't1{,1 li IS(rrri: llrl l&l)llr.h e out;ide his of tim( would o procedure desiglnoted e-ntorI oddress of such income tox outhority.i 20 Thus, ot'ter dtqiLolly signing the notice the inco,ne tox outhonty ltos lo issue it to the ossessee either :in poper .lorm or through clettrcuttc noil. Sub Scctton (1) of Section 13 of the A,t 2000 provides thot dtspotch of on plcctronrc record occurs when tt t nters o computet resautce outside the control of the originotor.tThe aJcresoid sub Section (1) of Section 13 inclicotes the point of timelpf issutnce of rl notice. Therefore, ofter o nottce is digitolly signed and whtn it is entered by the income tox outhority in computer resou control i.e. tllc control of the originotor then thot point be the tinte of tssuance of notrcc \" 21. Further, a Division Ber-rch ol' the Madhya fraflesh l{igh Court in the casc of Yuvraj vs. f ncome-Tax Oflicer I and otherse held at paragraph Nos.4 to 7 as unclcr. vrz n s I '4 thc aforcsoid newly inserted sectio specifitolly provtdes t'or issuonce of o notice il the As I 148 , now essing Officer re, I ,1quired to be odhered to by the Asscssinq Olficer ofter 1/04/2021 he dote on tokes o rlcr i io,r to inittolc rr. o pssment ond therefo hos Ltcan lotd down undtr c( tion 148-A which lis i.e. t which the Finonce Act, 2O21 contc into force 5. thr: counscl for tllc porttes werc heold and durilg the lr course of heoring, the counsel lor respondent/reveque Srhri Sonioy Lol produccd o latter doted 24/02/2022 beoring no. 1qO2 issr ed by lncome Tox Officer - 3 (1) of Bhopol which wosioddressed to the I counsel for lhc revenue ond in the soid letter it wos stotel thot \" 1zozz1 ++,t I.1'.R :r2{) lt ,I l I Perge 15 ol 29 l']S I .1 t{ -1'R,l l) I Sl19S lrrl lt l,,1Lcl, 24/02/2022 tond 'in view of the odmission by the counsel for respondents, we hove no hesitotion to hold thot the impugned notice is bod in the eye ol low, contoined in Annexure P/1 doted 31/03/2021 lr (received by the petitioner on 16/04/2021 through Emoil) inosmuch lr os ofter 1/04/2021, it is mondotorY requirement thot prior to re- I ossessment lroceedings notice under sectrcn 748-A of lncome Tox I Act, 1961 shbuld lbe issued to ossesseee. Since now in view of the I odmission bylthe respondents the other reliefs os sought for by the ln, i\"ti\"f clouse hove become redundont inosmuch os I ho dispute obout the dote oJ issuonce ol tlrc impugned i I 7 Accordingly, the impuqned notice dated i1/03/2021 (served through Emoil to the petitioner on 1'6/04/2021) stonds quoshed' However, it is lelt open for the respondents to toke recourse to the procedure loid down in newly enocted section 148-4 of the lncome Tox Act, 1951lif it is required under the low.\" 22. Recently, iDivision Bench of thc Delhi High Court also though in the notice which was issued to the petitioncr herein, the dote wos meh oned os 31/03/2021 but, the system of the oft'ice of the respondehts reveoled thot the Enoil to the petittoner wos in foct I sent on 16/04/2021. Thus, the counsel t'or respondent does not I dispute thot the notice which is impugned in the petition contoined in Annexure Pn in Joct wos issued on 16/04/2021 though the ddte on I the some wos mentioned os i1/03/2021 but wos issued loter on 6/04/2021 6. ln View bf the oforesdid letter so produced before us dated petttrcner tn now there is not ice. a endorsing the viewltaken by the Allahabad High Court as well as the Madhya Pradesh High Court (sttpra), in the case of Suman Jeet [)rr13 16 ol 29 P)l .1 N N'rRJ i' l:lrr! llll]Nl)rrrch Agarwal (supra1. Ir;rs clalroralr,lr rlealt with tltc said issrlc and held as unde r, YIZ \"16.1. rhe cxpression \"rssued\" hos been judiciolly interpreted by tlrc courts cts fromtng of thc order ond toking necessory o,tion to despotch th(' some. Therefort. merc qenerotton oJ notice on the lnconte Tax Business Applicotion portol doe< not sotisly the test ol \"issue\" vrithoLtt provtnq thot the some hos been despotcheo within thc time botring pcriod. (Delhi Development Authority v H. C. Khurono 1q Jt t5C( 1q6). notice should be scnt forth and q1o beyond the contlol of the oL.,thority issuing the sam€, to concludc thot it hos been issued.l(Konut hoi M. Potel (HUF) v. Hireri Bltott or ltis successors to ofiicl TZOtlll 534 tTR 25 (Gui)1. I I ri 16.3. The provtsiorts of section 149 of the Act of 7,961, does not contoin the t,xpression \"Assesstnq Offtccr\". Therefore, lno distinction con De n)ode betweetl tllc \"Assessitlg Ot't'icer\" ondl\"lnconte Tox Business ApplicotioD portal\" under sectrcn 149 of the Act of 19(;1. The time token by thc lncome Tox Busincss Applicationi softw(,re for trigg(ring of c ntoil ts ottribuloblc to the Assessing Officer ond since odmittedly tlt(,in1pt)qned notrc?s werc d\"rpotrh\") on)epril 1, 2021, 16.2. Even though thc service of noticet is howt'ver, for deternlining if o rtoticc hos been volid or thereoftcr, the somc ore tintc borred 16.4. Thc E-vcrit'icotion 5cheme, 2021. issued by not r€ levont, y tssu,td, the I I { i IlCentral Boord I ol Diiect Totr'., vidc NoliJicotDn beoring No. 137 Decembcr 13. )02) (l)0221 440 tfR tst.) 9 )tn po ,I stotes thot oft'ixotion of dig!tol signoturc certificote I o 2021, ddted rosl6, 9 old 11, in le-orocc.dinos I I Page 17
Other Referred Cases
Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal, R.K. Upadhyaya vs. Shanabhai P. Patel, Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani vs. C.P. Meena - De of Income Tax & 5 others, Malavika Enterprises vs. Central Ilr Board of Direct TAxei and others, Kanubhai M. Patel vs. Hiren Bhatts, Suman Jeet Agarwal vs. Income-Tax, Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others, Santosh Krishno HUF v. Union of lndia, G. S. Chotho Rice Mills vs. Union of lndia, Delhi Development Authority v H. C. Khurano, Income Tax Officer vs. Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF)
Laws Referred To
Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
1:1 Consultation on FEMA Compliance
₹1
Master The Pitch-Deck Game
₹0
1:1 Consultation on Business Development
₹1
Stress Management policy Letter
₹0
Affidavit - Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before ITAT - Type 2
Mehul₹0
Why Lacoste Won a 20-Year Trademark Battle Against Crocodile ?
Team Counselvise - March 10, 2026
Why Meesho got ₹1,500 Crore Tax Demand ?
Team Counselvise - March 09, 2026
Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT): Comprehensive Overview and Key Changes under Finance Bill, 2026
Team Counselvise - February 06, 2026