TANUJA SINGH V. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPTT OF REVENUE

WPC/1597/2022

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Tanuja Singh challenging a notice issued under unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31.03.2021, and the subsequent assessment order dated 29.03.2022. The petitioner argued that the notice was invalid due to the amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, which required a preliminary inquiry under the new Section 148A before reassessment proceedings. The respondents contended that the notice was validly issued within the extended limitation period due to the relaxation provided by the Taxation and Other Laws Act, 2020. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Ashish Agarwal, which deemed such notices as issued under the amended Section 148A, but found no applicability in this case as the notice was issued before the amendment came into effect.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 721767 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India and others versus Ashish Agarwal, Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 28293/2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM KUMAR; RAHUL LAMBA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMEET GADODIA
• Keywords: Finance Act 2021; Income Tax; Limitation Period; Notice; Reassessment
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 149; 144B; 148A

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(T) No. 1597 of 2022 Tanuja Singh --- --- Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes through its Chairman, New Delhi 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dhanbad. --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan --- For the Petitioner: Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate For the Resp.-Union of India: Mr. Gautam Kumar, C.G.S.C For the Resp.-I.T Department: Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate ---- 06 / 07.09.2022 In the present writ petition, the impugned notice issued under unamended section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is dated 31.03.2021. The assessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of Income Tax Act consequent thereto on 29.03.2022 has been sought to be challenged through I.A. No. 4129/2022 in the instant writ petition. In this case, as per the petitioner, notice was communicated on 03.04.2021 i.e. after 31.03.2021. Based on this fact, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the impugned notice under unamended section 148 of the Act is bad in law in view of amendment carried out by the Finance Act, 2021 bringing into force Section 148A which requires a preliminary enquiry before initiating reassessment proceedings. Since the impugned notice is bad in law, any assessment undertaken thereunder would necessarily be without jurisdiction and void. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment rendered by the Apex Court dated May 04, 2022 in the case of Union of India and others versus Ashish Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 3005/2022 and analogous Civil Appeals reported in [2022 SCC OnLine SC 543]. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 28293/2021 dated 03.03.2022 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition). It is submitted that the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court took note of the correspondence dated 24.02.2022 -2- bearing letter no. 1002 issued by the Income Tax Officer-3 (1) of Bhopal which showed that the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021 was in fact sent to the said petitioner on 16.04.2021 through e-mail. Therefore, the Hon’ble Court held that the impugned notice under unamended Section 148 issued after 01.04.2021, could not have been acted upon in view of amended section 148-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 brought into force with effect from 01.04.2021 to undertake reassessment proceedings without following the mandatory requirement of amended section 148-A of Income Tax Act. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondent Income Tax Department submits that reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court to support the plea of invalidity of the proceedings initiated pursuant to the notice dated 31.03.2021, would not come to the rescue of the petitioner since the Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (Supra), while exercising power under Article 142 of Constitution of India, held that all such notices under unamended section 148 of Income Tax Act issued by the Revenue after 01.04.2021 which were the subject matter of more than nine thousand writ petitions before the various High Courts would be deemed to be notices issued under amended section 148-A of Income Tax Act. The Apex Court while dispensing with the inquiry contemplated under section 148-A(a) of the Act with prior approval of the specified authority as a onetime measure, allowed the Assessees to take all defences including those available under section 149 of the Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned Assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021. Since the impugned notice in the present writ petition is dated 31.03.2021 and there is nothing on record to show that it was issued after 31.03.2021 and on the contrary, the assessment order as also the impugned notice themselves show that they were signed and issued on 31.03.2021, such a plea could not come to the aid of the petitioner. Since the assessment order has already been passed, petitioner should avail the remedy of appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. It has further been argued by the petitioner that the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021, issued under Section 148 of the Act, is beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 149 of the Act. The -3- limitation period prescribed under Section 149 for issuance of notice under Section 148 is six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. In this case the impugned notice has been issued for assessment year 2013-14 and accordingly the same could not have been issued after 31.03.2020. However, the impugned notice has been issued on 31.03.2021. 5. The respondent has submitted that as per Section 3(1) of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, the time limit for issuance of any notice under the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was required to be issued between 20.03.2020 to 31.12.2020, stood extended till 31.03.2021. Accordingly, the impugned notice issued on 31.12.2021 is within the limitation period extended by the said Act. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties on the plea raised herein and in view of Section 3(1) of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued within limitation period, further the assessment proceeding having been concluded pursuant to the notice dated 31.03.2021 issued upon the petitioner, we are of the considered view that the petitioner should avail the alternative remedy of appeal. Petitioner is at liberty to raise the instant plea as well before the Appellate Authority. Needless to say, the Appellate Authority shall examine the instant plea in accordance with law and after due inquiry on facts. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 4129/2022 is closed. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) Shamim/ "