Section 148A(b) Income Tax Act Requires Seven Days, Not Seven Working Days: Delhi High Court - 2026-05-24

Delhi High Court Clarifies Tax Assessment Timelines in Recent Ruling

In a significant order clarifying the procedural requirements under the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging a reassessment notice. The court ruled that the statutory window for responding to a show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) is seven days, explicitly rejecting the claimant’s argument that this period must consist of seven "working days."

Background: The Dispute Over "Accommodation Entries"

The petitioner, Abhishek Bansal, approached the court to challenge notices issued by the Income Tax Department concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The dispute stemmed from findings by the Assessing Officer (AO) that the petitioner had engaged in transactions worth over ₹72 lakh with one Ajay Gupta, the proprietor of M/s Gupta Paper Marts .

The department alleged that these transactions were "accommodation entries"—transactions routed through banking channels to provide a veneer of legitimacy to shell company activities, lacking any genuine commercial movement of goods. Upon finding that the counterparty’s GSTIN had been cancelled and that the entity was suspected of being a shell, the department initiated reassessment proceedings.

The Arguments: "Working Days" vs. Calendar Days

The petitioner argued that the notice issued on March 21, 2024, did not provide adequate opportunity for response because three of the seven days provided were public holidays. He contended that the statutory requirement under Section 148A(b) implied seven working days.

Conversely, the Revenue department maintained that the petitioner had not requested an extension and, crucially, had managed to file a response by March 29, 2024. They argued that the spirit of the provision was to ensure procedural fairness within a specified timeframe, which had been satisfied.

Legal Analysis: A Strict Interpretation of the Statute

The High Court’s ruling emphasized a literal interpretation of the Income Tax Act. The bench clarified that Section 148A(b) mandates that a notice period should be "not less than seven days and not exceeding thirty days."

The court noted that the language of the statute makes no distinction for public holidays. Furthermore, the court observed that the petitioner’s objection appeared to be an "afterthought," as he had successfully furnished a response—which included ledger accounts and bank statements—within the stated period. The bench held that even if the interpretation of excluding holidays were to be entertained, the petitioner had provided no evidence of seeking an extension or being prejudiced by the timeline.

Key Observations

The court’s reasoning highlights the importance of substantive compliance over mere technical arguments:

• "Clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act does not stipulate that the Assessee is required to be provided minimum of seven working days."
• "The contention that the petitioner was not afforded sufficient time to file a reply... clearly appears to be an afterthought as the petitioner had not made any request for further time."
• "The documents provided by the petitioner would establish that the payments had been made... [but] the same does not address the allegation of purchases reflected were accommodation entries."

Final Decision and Implications

Dismissing the petition, the Delhi High Court affirmed that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer were legally sound. This decision reinforces that taxpayers cannot rely on creative interpretations of administrative timelines to stall tax inquiries. For legal professionals and taxpayers alike, the ruling serves as a reminder that when challenging tax assessment procedures, the focus must remain on the substance of the commercial transactions rather than minor procedural grievances regarding notice periods. The reassessment process will now continue as scheduled under Section 142(1) of the Act.