IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
Mr. Aprameya Radhakrishna – Petitioner
Versus
Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Bangalore – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1968 of 2023 (T-IT)
Decided On : 12-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks quashing of notices and orders due to limitation. (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court analyzes procedural requirements based on past judgments. (Para 2 , 7 , 9) |
| 3. respondent argues there is no merit in the petition. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court concludes notices and orders are invalid due to timing. (Para 8) |
ORDER :
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:-
“(a) Quashing the instruction bearing No.1/2022 (F.No.279/Misc/M-51/2022-ITJ) dated 11.05.2022 issued by the 3rd Respondent (Annexure-G), to the extent questioned herein;
(b) Quashing the order dated 29.07.2022 bearing No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044301602(1) (Annexure- K) passed by the 1st Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Act, rejecting the Petitioner’s objection as to the initiation of the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 2016-17;
(c) Quashing the notice dated 29.07.2022 issued by the 1st Respondent (Annexure-L) under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2016-17; and
(d) Pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fir in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in relation to the assessment year 2016-17, the respondent No.1 issued a notice dated 29.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, prior to the said provisions being amended w.e.f., 01.04.2021. Subsequently, in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal – [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64 (SC), the Apex Court while dealing with the aforesaid amendment and notices issued to the assessee under subsequent to the amendment, issued the following directions:
“10. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments 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 or treated to be showcause 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 assesees can reply to the showcause 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 onetime measure visàvis 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);
(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 assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available.”
4. In pursuance of aforesaid directions issued by the Apex Court, PAN INDIA which applied to the petitioner and the notice dated 29.06.2021 also, which was

Notices issued for reassessment under the Income Tax Act must adhere to statutory time limits; those issued beyond the time limit are considered invalid.
Notices issued under sections 148 and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act beyond the specified limitation period are invalid and subject to quashing.
Notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act are invalid if they are issued beyond the stipulated 'surviving time' as established by the Apex Court, necessitating adherence to prescribed li....
Notices issued beyond the established statutory limitation are invalid and must be quashed, emphasizing compliance with timelines set by legal precedents in tax law.
Notices issued under the Income Tax Act beyond the statutory limitation set by Supreme Court precedents are invalid and must be quashed.
Notices and orders issued under the Income Tax Act were quashed as time-barred, adhering to Supreme Court mandates on limitation periods.
Notices issued beyond the limitation period established by the Income-tax Act and relevant Supreme Court directives are deemed invalid.
Notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued beyond prescribed limitation are invalid as per Supreme Court directives.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.