IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN and WMP.Nos.17847 & 17848 of 2023 Golden India Cityscapes Private Limited Rep By Its Authorised Signatory Having Registered Office At 2h, Ii Floor,Prince Arcade Cathedral Road, Chennai-600086.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Income Tax Officer Corp.Ward 2 (3), Chennai Chennai Wanarpathy Block, No.121 Mahatma Gadhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.

2. The Assessment Unit Income Tax Department, National E-

Assessment Centre, Delhi E-ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Delhi- 110 003.

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent contained in Impugned Assessment Order under 147 read with section 144 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA / AST/ S / 147 / 2023 - 24 / 1053213742 (1) dated 26.05.2023 for the assessment year 2016- 17 quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. Salai Varun Amrith Bhargav Kaveen Naveen Infant For Respondent(s): Mr. Avinash Krishna Ravi Senior Standing Counsel

ORDER

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Assessment order dated 26.05.2023 passed under Section 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed for the Assessment year 2016-2017 by the 2^nd respondent.

2. The petitioner had earlier filed its Return of Income on 13.09.2016, declaring a total taxable income of Rs.17,97,506/- for the Assessment year 2016-2017. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued with a Section 148 Notice dated 23.04.2021 under the provisions of the Income Tax Act under the old regime as in force till 31.03.2021.

3. Meanwhile, the Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered its judgement in Union of India and others vs. Shri Ashish Agarwal and others, which later clarified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs.Rajeev Bansal, 2024 SCC Online SC 2993.

4. It is in this background, a fresh notice dated 23.05.2022 and

24.05.2022 was issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act under the new regime as in force with effect from 01.04.2021, to which the petitioner filed a reply on 23.06.2022. Pursuant to which, an order dated 26.07.2022 was passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act under the new regime.

5. The reasons stated for invoking the provisions for reassessment in the Notice dated 23.05.2022 / 24.05.2022 are as follows:-

6. Facts on record reveal that a Notice dated 16.06.2022 was issued under Section 144A(b) of the Act, to which the petitioner responded vide reply dated

23.06.2022, wherein the petitioner had stated as follows:-

“We would also like to state that there was no such transaction entered with Shri Naresh Manakchand Jain & his associates in the nature referred in your notice which is reiterated above. The information provided above was complete allegation made on us. We also attach a copy of our financial statement for the period 01.04.2015 to 31.06.2016 to substantiating our claim.

Hence, we kindly request you to consider our explanation and drop the proceedings under 148A.”

7. The re-assessment proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the said Assessment year under the provisions of ultimately culminated in the issuance of Section 148 notice of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the new regime which came into force with effect from 01.04.2021.

8. Pursuant thereto, fresh notices were issued under Section 144B of the Act and the assessment proceedings were proceeded under the said provision. It is noticed that Notices under Section 142(1) were also issued on 14.03.2023 calling for certain information from the petitioner, to which the petitioner replied on 29.03.2023.

9. In the reply dated 29.03.2023 of the petitioner to the notice dated

14.03.2023 issued under Section 142 (1) of the Act, the petitioner reiterated the contents of the earlier reply dated 23.06.2022 submitted in response to Notice