The court ruled that procedural requirements for issuing notice under Section 148 must be strictly complied with; failure to do so renders such notices time-barred and invalid.

JUDGMENT :

BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. B.S. Soparkar for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel for the respondent no.2.

2. Having regard to the controversy arising in the petition which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.

3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.

4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2013-14 as well as the Assessment Order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the respondent – Assessing Officer under Section Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act during the pendency of this petition.

5. The brief facts of the case are as under:

5.1. The petitioner filed Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2013-14 declaring its gross total income as ‘NIL’ on 28.09.2013. The respondent has issued notice dated 31.03.2021 under Section 148 of the Act under the provisions of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (for short “the TOLA”. It is the case of the petitioner that neither the notice dated 31.03.2021 was uploaded on ITBA portal nor sent to the petitioner through E-mail or speed post on or before 31.03.2021, but the physical copy of the notice was received by the petitioner on 06.04.2021. It is also the case of the petitioner that the web portal does not bear the date of issuance of the impugned notice and it only refers to state that the notice was sent through an E-mail, but in fact, no such E-mail was received by the petitioner. It is also the case of the petitioner that the speed post which was dispatched by the respondent – Assessing Officer was bearing the date 04.04.2021 i.e. after 31.03.2021.

5.2. The petitioner filed the revised Return of Income for the relevant Assessment Year on 27.04.2021 in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, the reasons for reopening was provided to the petitioner on 10.06.2021 without any annexures referred therein. The petitioner therefore, preferred Special Civil Application No. 10596 of 2021 challenging the impugned notice. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner was supplied with the reasons recorded for reopening and subsequently by order dated 18.01.2022, the writ petition was disposed of requiring the petitioner to submit objections against the reasons for reopening. The petitioner filed objections on 12.03.2022 and 19.03.2022 against the reasons supplied for reopening.

5.3. The respondent no. 3 National Faceless Assessment Centre, disposed of the objections by order dated 21.03.2022. The petitioner thereafter preferred this petition on 27.03.2022. This Court (Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Ms.Justice Nisha M. Thakore) passed the following order on 29.03.2022

“We have heard Mr. S.N. Soparkar, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B.S. Soparkar, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant.

Issue Notice to the respondents, returnable on 05.07.2022.

Let there be ad-interim order in terms of paragraph 9(c).”

5.4. The petitioner also informed the respondent on the web portal that this Court had granted the stay of the further proceedings of the impugned notice by the interim order passed on 29.03.2022 as refl