IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JODHPUR
AKIL ABDUL HAMID KURESHI, MADAN GOPAL VYAS, JJ.
Sukhdev International Private Limited and Others – Appellants
Versus
Union of India and Others – Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 468, 652, 655, 660, 671, 672, 675, 1544 of 2022, 10258, 11940, 16038, 16073, 16085, 16104, 16331, 16355, 16743, 16754, 16760, 16812, 16814, 16816, 16828, 16831, 16871, 16879, 16881, 16952, 17289, 17649, 17667, 17707, 17714, 17724, 17758, 17796, 17805, 17806, 17816, 17823, 17834, 17850, 17885, 17887, 17892, 17914, 17917, 18112 of 2021
Decided On : 28-01-2022
Income Tax Act - Section 148-A - Finance Act, 2021 - Section 148 - Enabling Assessing - Issuance of notice to assessee - Petitioners assessees have challenged respective notices of re-assessment issued by assessing officer - All these notices are issued after and pertain to assessment period prior to said - According to petitioners these notices are issued provisions for re-assessment contained in Income Tax Act, 1961 which prevailed period prior in particular in none of these cases procedure laid down under Section 148-A of Income Tax Act which was inserted with effect from by the Finance Act has been followed - Petitioners have therefore challenged the validity of these notices - Held, 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 upto 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 the notifications issued in exercise of such powers had to be within confines of such powers - In plain terms under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the 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 - Even otherwise it is extremely doubtful whether the explanation in guise of clarification can change very basis of the 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 - Petitions are disposed of accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
1. These writ petitions involve identical issues. The petitioners assessees have challenged respective notices of re-assessment issued by the assessing officer. All these notices are issued after 01.04.2021 and pertain to the assessment period prior to the said date. According to the petitioners, these notices are issued under the provisions for re-assessment contained in the Income Tax Act, 1961, which prevailed period prior to 01.04.2021, in particular, in none of these cases the procedure laid down under Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act, which was inserted with effect from 01.04.2021 by the Finance Act, has been followed. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged the validity of these notices.
2. The revenue does not dispute these factual averments of the petitioners.
3. In a judgment delivered yesterday i.e. 27.01.2022 in the case of Sudesh Taneja vs. Income Tax Officer and Others [D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022] the Division Bench in the identical circumstances quashed the impugned notices of re-assessment 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.