HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, Sudesh Bansal, JJ.
Nikhil Pulses Private Limited & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1) & Ors. – Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 2957/2022, 2958/2022, 2960/2022, 2963/2022, 2965/2022, 2966/2022, 2982/2022, 2994/2022 and 2995/2022
Decided On : 22-02-2022
Income Tax Act - Validity of notices for reassessment - Section 148, Section 149, Section 148A - The court discussed the provisions under the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning reassessment and their application to notices issued after 01.04.2021 for past assessment periods. The court highlighted the changes in time limits for issuing notice for reassessment, the concept of income chargeable to tax escaping assessment, and the procedure for issuing notice under Section 148. The court concluded that the newly introduced provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 would apply to notices issued after 01.04.2021, and invalidated the impugned notices for not following the procedure contained in Section 148A of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The issue involved the validity of notices for reassessment issued by the assessing officers after 01.04.2021 for past assessment periods but applying the provisions under the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning reassessment which were issued prior to 01.04.2021 before their substitution by new set of provisions under the Finance Act, 2021.
Finding of the Court:
The court quashed the impugned notices, highlighting the changes in reassessment provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 and the procedure for issuing notice under Section 148. The court concluded that the notices were invalid and bad in law, and upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge in quashing the notices.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of notices for reassessment issued after 01.04.2021 for past assessment periods, and the applicability of the newly introduced provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 to such notices.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the newly introduced provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 would apply to notices issued after 01.04.2021, and invalidated the impugned notices for not following the procedure contained in Section 148A of the Act.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned notices and allowed all the writ petitions, dismissing the appeals of the revenue.
JUDGMENT
1. In all these petitions issue involved is identical namely the validity of notices for reassessment issued by the assessing officers after 01.04.2021 for past assessment periods but applying the provisions under the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning reassessment which were issued prior to 01.04.2021 before their substitution by new set of provisions under the Finance Act, 2021. This will be clear from the following data:-
S.No. | D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. | Date of impugned notice of reassessment | Assessment Year concerned |
1. | DBCWP No.2957/2022 | 04.06.2021 | 2013-14 |
2. | DBCWP No.2958/2022 | 24.06.2021 | 2013-14 |
3.. | DBCWP No.2960/2022 | 17.06.2021 | 2017-18 |
4. | DBCWP No.2963/2022 | 04.06.2021 | 2013-14 |
5. | DBCWP No.2965/2022 | 17.06.2021 | 2016-17 |
6. | DBCWP No.2966/2022 | 04.06.2021 | 2014-15 |
7. | DBCWP No.2982/2022 | 30.06.2021 | 2013-14 |
8. | DBCWP No.2994/2022 | 30.06.2021 | 2013-14 |
9. | DBCWP No.2995/2022 | 30.06.2021 | 2015-16 |
2. Identical issue had come up for consideration before this Court in case of Sudesh Taneja v. Income Tax Officer (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022) in which vide judgment dated 27.01.2022 the impugned notices were quashed making the following observations:-
"37. In this context we have perused the provisions of reassessment contained in the Finance Act, 2021. We have noticed earlier the major departure that the new scheme of reassessment has made under these provisions. The time limits for issuing notice for reassessment have been changed. The concept of income chargeable to tax escaping assessment on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly or fully all material facts is no longer relevant. Elaborate provisions are made under Section 148A of the Act enabling the Assessing Officer to make enquiry with respect to material suggesting that income has escaped assessment, issuance of notice to the assessee calling upon why notice under Section 148 should not be issued and passing an order considering the material available on record including response of the assessee if made while deciding whether the case is fit for issuing notice under Section 148. There is absolutely no indication in all these provisions which would suggest that the legislature intended that the new scheme of reopening of assessments would be applicable only to the period post 01.04.2021. In absence of any such indication all notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 had to be in accordance with such provisions. To reiterate, we find no indication whatsoever in the scheme of statutory provisions suggesting that the past provisions would continue to apply even after the substitution for the assessment periods prior to substitution. In fact there are strong indications to the contrary. We may recall, that time limits for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act have been modified under substituted Section 149. Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 149 reduces such period to three years instead of originally prevailing four years under normal circumstances. Clause (b) extends the upper limit of six years previously prevailing to ten years in cases where income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to 50 lacs or more. Sub-section (1) of Section 149 thus contracts as well as expands the time limit for issuing notice under Section 148 depending on the question whether the case falls under clause (a) or clause (b). In this context the first proviso to Section 149(1) provides that no notice under Section 148 shall be issued at any time in a case for the relevant assessment year beginning on or before 01.04.2021 if such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 149 as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021. As per this proviso thus no notice under Section 148 would be issued for the past assessment years by resorting to the larger period of limitation prescribed in newly substituted clause (b)
Indian Express Newspaper vs. Union of India
J.K. Industries Ltd. and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.
Shayara Bano vs. Union of India
The State of Jammu & Kashmir, vs. Triloki Nath Khosa and Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the newly introduced provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 would apply to notices issued after 01.04.2021 for reassessment, and the notices i....
The new scheme of reassessment under the provisions of the Finance Act, 2021 applies to notices issued after 01.04.2021, and the extended time limits for issuing notice under section 148 cannot be pr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the newly introduced provisions under the Finance Act, 2021 would apply to notices issued after 01.04.2021, and any notices issued without fol....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the new scheme of reassessment under the Finance Act, 2021 to past assessment years and the validity of notifications issued b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the new provisions of reassessment under the Finance Act, 2021 would apply to all notices issued after 01.04.2021, and any notices issued with....
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.