Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
YASHWANT VARMA, DHARMESH SHARMA
Rohit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward 54 (1), Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to reassessment notice (Para 1) |
| 2. contention on digital signing (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. validity of reassessment notices (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. legal fiction and jurisdiction (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. writ petition allowed (Para 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The writ petitioner seeks to question the invocation of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) by the respondents in relation to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The challenge appears to have been originally mounted basis the digital signing of the notice under Section 148 on 09 April 2021 although it bore a date of 31 March 2021. The petitioner appears to have originally contended that since the notice would be deemed to have been issued on 09 April 2021, it would be the reassessment regime as introduced by virtue of Finance Act, 2021 which would have been applicable. This according to the writ petitioner would have required the respondents to follow the procedure as prescribed by Section 148A of the Act which had come to be introduced by virtue of Finance Act, 2021. It is these aspects which came to be notice
Notices issued under the old regime must comply with new provisions under Section 148A, and reassessment actions are invalid if they do not meet the threshold or proper authority approval.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
