SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Guj) 598

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.V. ANJARIA, NIRAL R. MEHTA, JJ.
M/S SAFAL CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) PVT. LTD. – Petitioner
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD – Respondent
Special Civil Application Nos. 3301, 3303, 3305, 3309, 3312 of 2023
Decided On : 10-03-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: HIREN J. TRIVEDI.
For the Respondents: VARUN K. PATEL, DEV PATEL, NIKUNT RAVAL, KALPANA K. RAVAL.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 148A(d) - Special Civil Application - Income Tax - re-opening of assessment - Challenge the notices – Held, These notices cannot be issued as per the amended provision of Act - all the impugned notices in respective petitions under section 148 of Act relatable to Assessment year or assessment year, as case may be, are beyond permissible time limit, liable to be treated illegal and without jurisdiction - Since petitions deserve to be allowed on the aforesaid crisp legal ground alone, learned advocates for parties submitted to agree that facts and other legal issues may not be gone into by Court - Accordingly, they are neither delineated, nor are gone into in respect of above petitions - Petitions stand allowed

JUDGMENT :

N.V. ANJARIA, J.

1. All these Special Civil Applications seeking to challenge the notices issued for re-opening of the assessment for the assessment years concerned under Section 148 and the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

1.1 The petitions involve similar facts and identical issues, therefore, they were heard together to be treated for disposal by this common judgment and order.

1.2 In the facts and circumstances of the case, having regard to the issues involved and with consent and request of learned advocates for the parties, all these Special Civil Applications were taken up for final consideration today.

2. Rule returnable in each of the Special Civil Applications forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.Varun Patel and learned advocate Mrs.Kalpana Raval for the respondent Revenue in the respective petitions waives service of Rule.

2.1 Heard learned advocate Mr.Hiren Trivedi for the petitioners and learned advocate for the respondent.

3. In the present petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the respective petitioners have called in question the notice issued by respondent-assessing officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen the assessment in respect of assessment year 2013-14 or assessment year 2014-15 as the case may be. Also challenged are the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

3.1 The details of date of notice, date of order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, assessment year, etc. in respect of all the petitioners are given in the table below:

S. No.

Special Civil Application No.

Date of Notice under Section 148

Date of Order under Section 148A(d)

Assessment Year

1.

3301 of 2023

29.07.2022

29.07.2022

2013-14

2.

3303 of 2023

31.07.2022

31.07.2022

2014-15

3.

3305 of 2023

31.07.2022

31.07.2022

2013-14

4.

3309 of 2023

26.07.2022

26.07.2022

2014-15

5.

3312 of 2023

31.07.2022

31.07.2022

2013-14

3.2 While in the respective impugned orders under section 148A(d) of the Act mentioned are the factual details and the reasons on the basis of which the assessing officer has found that the cases are fit to be reopened for the assessment in respect of the year under consideration, it is inter alia stated that the notice under section 148 of the Act was originally issued for the assessment years 2013-14 or 2014-15, as the case may be. All the said notices were treated as show-cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, (2023) 1 SCC 617 : (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) and that thereupon, the order under section 148A(d) was passed.

4. At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act and the consequential order under section 148A(d) of the Act issued by the department for assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 are barred on the ground of limitation, the notices having been issued after passage of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

4.1 It was submitted that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer being Special Civil Application No. 17321 of 2021 and allied petitions, decided on 07.02.2023, the question of legality of the notice issued in respect of Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-15 is covered and the impugned notice is without jurisdiction as it is beyond the time limit prescribed.

5. In order to properly understand the controversy and the applicable provisions in particular, prior to coming into force of Finance Act, 2021 called old regime as well as the provisions introduced in the Finance Act, 2021 described as new regime, the development of the law ema

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            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

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top