IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
AKIL ABDUL HAMID KURESHI, SUDESH BANSAL, JJ.
Kanhaya Lal Agarwal, S/o. Shri Jugal Kishore Agarwal - Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7 - Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15138 of 2021
Decided On : 15-02-2022
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 148A, 148 - Finance Act, 2021 - Relaxation Act, 2020 - Section 3 - Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 - Notice of reassessment - Petitioner has challenged a notice of reassessment for assessment year 2013-14 - Learned counsel for petitioner pointed out that assessing officer has applied old provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 for issuing notice and procedure prescribed under Section 148A of Act which was inserted with effect has not been followed – Held, With this background court may revert to Relaxation Act, 2020 and the two notifications issued by CBDT - Court may recall, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of Relaxation Act, 2020 while extending time limits for taking action and making compliances in specified Acts power was given to Central Government to extend time further by issuing a notification - This was the only power vested in Central Government - As a piece of delegated legislation notifications issued in exercise of such powers, had to be within confines of such powers - In plain terms under subsection (1) of Section 3 of Relaxation Act, 2020 Government of India was authorized to extend time limits by issuing notifications in this regard - Issuing any explanation touching provisions of Income Tax Act was not part of this delegation at all - CBDT while issuing notifications when introduced an explanation which provided by way of clarification that for purposes of issuance of notice under Section 148 as per time limits specified in Section 149 or 151, provisions as they stood as before commencement of Finance Act, 2021 shall apply, plainly exceeded its jurisdiction as a subordinate legislation - Subordinate legislation could not have travelled beyond powers vested in Government of India by parent Act - Even otherwise it is extremely doubtful whether explanation in guise of clarification can change very basis of statutory provisions - If plain meaning of statutory provision and its interpretation is clear, by adopting a position different in an explanation and describing it to be clarificatory, subordinate legislature cannot be permitted to amend provisions of parent Act - Accordingly, these explanations are unconstitutional and declared as invalid - Petition stands disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has challenged a notice of reassessment dated 19.04.2021 for the assessment year 2013-14. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the assessing officer has applied the old provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for issuing notice and the procedure prescribed under Section 148A of the Act which was inserted with effect from 01.04.2021 has not been followed.
2. Under similar circumstances in a judgment dated 27.01.2022 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.969/2022-Sudesh Taneja v. Income Tax officer and Anr. and other connected matters, we had quashed the reassessment notices making following observations:
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.