M/s SHREE HANUMAN LOHA PRIVATE LIMITED V. UNION OF INDIA

WPT/145/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Shree Hanuman Loha Private Limited, represented by its director, challenging the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds that it was time-barred. The respondents included various authorities from the Ministry of Finance and the Income Tax Department. The core legal issue revolved around the applicability of a Supreme Court judgment in Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal, which addressed the validity of notices issued under the unamended Section 148 post the Finance Act, 2021. The Supreme Court's ruling in the Agarwal case led to the modification of such notices, treating them as show-cause notices under the newly amended Section 148A, thereby providing a framework for reassessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 737674 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAM SAHU; AMIT CHAUDHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: APURV GOYAL
• Keywords: Income Tax; Supreme Court judgment; Time barred notice; Validity of notice
• Section: 148; 149; 148A

Judgement Text

"1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 145 of 2022 M/s Shree Hanuman Loha Private Limited, a company incorporated under Companies Act, 2013, through its Director Shri Amit Jindal s/o Shri Maman Ram Jindal, aged about 39 years, registered office at 251/252, Near Agrasen Chowk, Bajrang Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India Through The Ld. Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, (Department Of Revenue) No. 137, North Block, New Delhi-110001 2. Central Board Of Direct Tax, Through Its Ld. Chairman Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue) North Block, New Delhi, 110002 3. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur -1, New C.R. Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Raipur, Aayakar Bhawan, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5. Additional/Joint/Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Now Known As National Faceless Assessment Centre), Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue) North Block, New Delhi -110001 ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ram Narayan Sahu, CGC For Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 : Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant , Judge Order on Board Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice 11.05.2022 Heard Mr. Apurv Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ram Narayan Sahu, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing 2 for respondent No.1 and Mr. Amit Chaudhari, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. 2. At the outset, Mr. Chaudhari submits that this case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal, reported in (2022) SCC Online SC 543. 3. Mr. Goyal, however, submits that the present case is not covered as the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not a valid notice as the same was time-barred. 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed of the aforesaid case holding as follows : “26. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgment and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:- (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed 3 or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-a-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under Section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); 4 (iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assesses and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 27. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 28. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by 5 the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only. 5. A perusal of the above would go to show that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down that all defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assesses and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 6. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that this case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Union of India & Others v. Ashish Agarwal (supra). Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Sd/- Sd/- (Arup Kumar Goswami) (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Chief Justice Judge Chandra "