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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 2778

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. SARAVANAN, J.
Ramadoss Srikanthi - Petitioner 
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Cuddalore, II Floor, Cuddalore Income Tax Officer, Soorappa Naicken Chavadi, Cuddalore – Respondent 
W.P. No.22901 of 2022 and W.M.P. No.21931 of 2022 and W.M.P. No.35254 of 2023
Decided On : 03-04-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. N.V. Balaji
For the Respondent: Mr. V. Mahalingam, Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs. S. Premalatha, Junior Standing Counsel.

The notices under the amended Income Tax Act are valid even if previously invalid notices existed, provided conditions of procedural compliance and limitation exclusions are met.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 148 and 149 - The petitioner challenged notices issued under these sections pertaining to the assessment year 2015-2016. The impugned notices were deemed to have been issued under Section 148-A of the amended Act as of 01.04.2021 based on a Supreme Court ruling in 'Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal'. The court reaffirmed that proceedings initiated under the old regime notices could continue under the new regime provided the issued notices complied with procedural mandates and limitations set forth in the Act. (Paras 1-49)

(B) Jurisdiction - Statutory authority may lack jurisdiction if preliminary conditions under the statute are not satisfied. (Paras 12-12)

(C) Limitation - Computation of limitation includes excluding periods due to necessary legal procedures of showing cause to assessees, with emphasis on ensuring both Revenue and assessee rights are maintained during transitional phases of the law. (Paras 32-52)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged several notices issued dated 31.03.2021 and 30.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act relating to the assessment year 2015-2016. He contended that the notices were issued beyond the limitation period under applicable laws due to prior notices being invalid.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the impugned notices had been validly issued and were within the permissible limitation, considering legal fictions and modifications made by the Supreme Court’s previous judgments.

Issues: Whether the notices issued under the amended Income Tax Act were valid despite limitations allegedly expired under previous provisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court confirmed that the issuance of notices under the new provisions was permissible provided necessary procedural steps and exclusions for computation of limitations were adhered to, referencing previous Supreme Court decisions.

Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. validity of notices (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. decision context (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 12)
3. jurisdiction issues (Para 9 , 10 , 14)
4. final judgement (Para 26 , 27 , 30)

ORDER :

(C. SARAVANAN, J.)

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the following Notice(s) and Order as detailed below:-

Sl. No.DateDetailsAssessment Year
1.31.03.2021Impugned Section 148 Notice as in force till 31.03.2021.2015-2016
2.30.07.2022Impugned Order passed under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
3.30.07.2022Impugned Section 148 Notice as in force with effect from 01.04.2021.

2. The first mentioned Impugned Notice dated 31.03.2021 was issued under Section 148 of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 as in force till 31.03.2021. It was however reportedly served on the petitioner on 12.04.2021.

3. It was deemed to be a notice issued under Section148A(b) of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 as in force with effect from 01.04.2021 in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “ Union of India and others Vs. Ashish Agarwal , 2022 SCC Online SC 543” rendered on 04.05.2022.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in “ Union of India and others Vs. Ashish Agarwal , 2022 SCC Online SC 543”, summarized the legal position as follows:-

24. There appears to be genuine non-application of the amendments as the officers of the Revenue may have been under a bona fide belief that the amendments may not yet have been enforced. Therefore, we are of the opinion that some leeway must be shown in that regard which the High Courts could have done so. Therefore, instead of quashing and setting aside the reassessment notices issued under the unamended provision of the IT Act, the High Courts ought to have passed an order construing the notices issued under the unamended Act/unamended provision of the IT Act as those deemed to have been issued under Section 148 -A of the IT Act as per the new provision Section 148 -A and the Revenue ought to have been permitted to proceed further with the reassessment proceedings as per the substituted provisions of Sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act as per the Finance Act, 2021, subject to compliance of all the procedural requirements and the defences, which may be available to the assessee under the substituted provisions of Sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act and which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law.

25. Therefore, we propose to modify the judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts as under:

25.1. The respective impugned Section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148 -A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and treated to be show-cause notices in terms of Section 148 -A(b). The respective assessing officers shall within thirty days from today provide to the assessees the information and material relied upon by the Revenue so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter.

25.2. The requirement of conducting any enquiry with the prior approval of the specified authority under Section 148 - A(a) be dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under Section 148 of the unamended Act from 1-4-2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts.

25.3. The assessing officers shall thereafter pass an order in terms of Section 148 -A(d) after following the due procedure as required under Section 148 -A(b) in respect of each of the assessees concerned.

25.4. All the defences which may be available to the assessee under Section 149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open and/or shall continue to be available.

25.5. The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts quashing the similar notices issued under unamended Section 148 of the IT Act irrespective of whe

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