IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: July 07, 2025 RAJIV KUMAR LOHIA .....PETITIONER V/S UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLR MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate, Mr. Rishab Singla, Advocate, Mr. Mohit Bassi, Advocate, Mr. Atharv Prabhakar, Advocate, and Ms. Alisha Chawla, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department, with Mr.V. Vedika Rao, Advocate, for the respondents (through V.C.)

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to order dated 24.03.2025, Demand Notice dated 24.03.2025, order dated 29.07.2022 passed under Section 148 A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act, 1961’) and notice dated 30.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

BRIEF FACTS

2. Brief facts of the present case as per pleadings are that petitioner received notice dated 05.04.2021 under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on the ground that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2017-18 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section

147 of the Act, 1961.

3. On 27.11.2021, petitioner received another notice seeking clarification on certain issues as annexed with the notice. He challenged the proceedings by way of filing CWP No. 239 of 2022, which was disposed of as not pressed in view of order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Ashish Aggarwal [2022] SCC ONLINE SC 543, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had observed that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 would be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A (b) and the assessing officer was directed to provide information to the assessees to enable them to file their response and thereafter, the assessing officer was directed to pass orders under Section 148A (d). The petitioner received notice dated 25.05.2022 under Section 148A (b) of the Act, 1961. In response to the same, he filed reply. After considering the reply, order dated 29.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) was passed. Petitioner, thereafter, received notice dated 30.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

4. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner preferred CWP No. 25126 of 2022 challenging the notice not only on the ground of limitation but also approval accorded by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 151 of the Act as well as the proceedings.

5. During pendency of said writ petition filed by the petitioner i.e. CWP No. 25126 of 2022, the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its judgment dated 03.10.2024 in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC), held that the Taxation and Other Laws Amendment Act, 2021 is applicable for the notices issued between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 and, therefore, the notices issued for the years 2013-14 and 2014-15 are not barred by limitation if issued within the said period. It was further held that the approval, as per the provisions of Section 151, is required to be given by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, if the notice has been issued within a period of three years from the assessment year, to which the period relates to and by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, if the notice has been issued beyond the period of three years involving an amount more than Rs. 50 lacs represented in the form of asset.

6. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Rajeev Bansal (Supra), the ground of limitation taken by the petitioner in CWP No. 25126 of 2022 was dropped and the writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 20.12.2024 by deciding the issue of jurisdiction of JAO holding that the notices are validly issued.

7. Petitioner received notice dated 03.12.2024 under Section 142 (1) of the Act, 1961. He filed reply to the same. Thereafter, order under Section 147 read with Section 144B dated 24.03.2025 was passed and Demand Notice