A.F.R.

Court No. - 3

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 78 of 2022

Petitioner :- Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav Mehrotra

Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

1.

Heard Sri Dhruv Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate, who on our

request assisted the Court as Amicus curiae and also heard Sri Abhinav

Mehrotra, and Sri Kapil Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri

Gaurav Mahajan, learned Senior standing counsel for the respondents i.e.

Income Tax Department.

2.

Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the petitioner is a

regular assessee. It filed its return of Income under Section 139 (1) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act 1961”) on

29.09.2013 for the Assessment Year 2013 – 14 and the assessment was

completed.

3.

Subsequently, the Assessing Authority attempted to initiate

proceedings under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. For this purpose, a notice

under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 was

digitally signed by the Assessing Authority on 31.3.2021. It was sent to

the assesses through e-mail and e-mail was undisputedly received by the

petitioner on his registered e-mail I .D. on 06.04.2021. The limitation for

issuing notice under Section 148 read with Section 149 of the Act, 1961

was upto 31.03.2021 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

4.

Under the circumstances, the petitioner filed objections before the

Assessing Authority. One of the objections raised by the petitioner was

that the notice is time barred and thus without jurisdiction as it was issued

on 06.04.2021 whereas the limitation for issuing notice under Section 148

read with Section 149 of the Act 1961 expired on 31.03.2021. The

objection filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Assessing Authority

holding that since the notice was digitally signed on 31.03.2021,

therefore, it shall be deemed to have been issued within time i.e. on

31.03.2021.

5.

Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, praying

for the following reliefs:-

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing

the notice under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, Dt.31.03.2021; and the

connected proceedings for reassessment of Income for A.Y. 2013-14.

(b) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or an order prohibiting the

operation of the proceedings initiated by the respondent number 2”.

6.

Yesterday, this writ petition was hard at length and following

questions were framed for determination :-

“(i) Whether digitally signing notice would automatically amount to

issuance of notice ?

(ii) Whether digitally signing a notice and issuing it are two different

acts ?

(iii) Whether issuance of notice shall take place on the date and time

when it is dispatched either electronically or through other mode ?

(iv) Whether merely generating notice from the Departmental Portal on

31.3.2021 and digitally signing it thereafter, would amount to issuance

of notice ?

(v) Even if it is assumed that the notice under Section 148 of the

Income Tax Act was issued on 31.3.2022 and despatched on 6.4.2022

then whether the unamended provision of Section 148 or amended

provision of Section 148 would apply ?”

7.

With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, only

question nos. (i) (ii) (iii) & (iv), as aforequoted, are being decided and the

question No. (v) is left open.

2

Submissions

8.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that digitally signing a

notice is an act different from the act of issuing the notice. Section 149

provides limitation for issuance of the notice under section 148. When

the notice has been issued to the petitioner by the Assessing Authority

beyond the period of limitation i.e. after. 31.03.2021, therefore, the notice

is time barred and no proceeding can be carried by the Assessing

Authority pursuant to the impugned n