Reassessment notices issued under the old regime of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are validly transitioned to the new regime under Section 148A, and the limitation period for such proceedings excludes the time during which notices were stayed by legal interventions or judicial directions.

ORDER

1.In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the Order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and consequential Notice dated 30.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the new regime as in force with effect from 01.04.2021 for the Assessment Year 2014-2015.

2. This is the second round of litigation before this Court. Earlier, the petitioner was issued with a Notice dated 31.03.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the old regime as in force till 31.03.2021 for the Assessment Year 2014-2015. This ultimately culminated in the Order dated 27.01.2022 disposing of the objection raised by the Petitioner to re-open the assessment.

3. The said Order dated 27.01.2022 and Section 148 Notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under the old regime was the subject matter of challenge by the Petitioner in W.P.4546 of 2022 which was filed on 22.02.2022.

4. Meanwhile, the Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered its judgement in Ashish Agarwal case, referred to supra which later clarified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal , 2024 SCC Online SC 2993.

5. It is in this background, a fresh Notice dated 30.05.2022 under Section 148A(b) of the Act under the new regime was issued to the Petitioner for the aforesaid Assessment Year in the light of the aforesaid decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

6. At this stage, the said Writ Petition was closed on 06.07.2023 in the light of the fresh Notice issued to the Petitioner on 30.05.2022 under Section 148A(b) of the Act under the new regime. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Court in W.P.4546 of 2022, the petitioner ought to have filed a reply to the aforesaid Notice dated 30.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act under the new regime.

7. However, the petitioner failed to respond to the same and thus suffered the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the consequential Notice dated 30.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act under the new regime as in force with effect from 01.04.2021.

8. It is the specific case of the Petitioner that even though the Petitioner failed to respond to the Notice dated 30.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the entire re-assessment proceeding was without jurisdiction.

9. The challenge to the re-assessment proceeding which culminated in the impugned order and Notice is mainly on the ground that the Respondent changed their stance in re-opening the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-2015.

10. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the stand taken in the Section 148 Notice dated 31.03.2021 issued under the old regime which was the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.4546 of 2022 and the stand in the Notice dated 30.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act under the new regime which culminated in the impugned order and notice are different.

11. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the impugned proceedings are liable to be interfered with. It is stated that the conclusion in the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is in conflict with the conclusion arrived in order dated 27.01.2022 passed in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in G.K.N. Driveshafts (India) Limited Vs. Income Tax Officer and others., (2003) 1 SCC 72.

12. The learned Ju