First India Estates And Services Pvt. Ltd v. Income Tax Officer & Anr

$~99*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 417/2023 FIRST INDIA ESTATES AND SERVICES PVT. LTD......PetitionerThrough:Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Vaibhav Kulkarni, Mr. A. Bali & Mr.Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR......RespondentsThrough:Mr. Debesh Panda, Ms. Zehra Khan,Mr. Vikramaditya, Ms. A. Shankar,Ms. Yashika & Ms. Delphina, Advs. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R24.04.2025 % 1.The petitioner [Assessee] has filed the present petition, inter alia,impugning a notice dated 30.07.2022 [the impugned notice] issued underSection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] in respect of theAssessment Year 2014-15. It is the Assessee’s case that the impugnednotice has been issued beyond the prescribed period of limitation. 2.The initial notice under Section 148 of the Act for AY 2014-15 wasissued on 21.06.2021. The said notice was unsustainable as it was issued inaccordance with the statutory regime as existed prior to 31.03.2021. Thiscourt in the case of Mon Mohan Kohli v. Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax & Anr.: Neutral Citation No.: 2021:DHC:4181-DB had set aside suchnotices that were issued after 31.03.2021 without following the procedure asprescribed under Section 148A of the Act. However, the Supreme Court inthe case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal: (2023) 1 SCC 617,issued directions for considering the said notices as the notices issued underThis is a digitally signed order.Section 148A(b) of the Act and further granted time to the Assessing OfficerThe authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2025 at 16:04:43 to supply the material on which such notices were premised. 3.In compliance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in thecase of Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal (supra), the AssessingOfficer (AO) provided information and material to the Assessee on23.05.2022. The Assessee was granted two weeks’ time to respond to the saidnotice. The Assessee responded to the notice dated 23.05.2022 by a letterdated 20.06.2022. 4.The AO passed an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act on30.07.2022. According to the Assessee, the same was beyond the period asstipulated. 5.In the present case, the period of six years from the end of theassessment year for issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act expired on31.03.2021. Thus, in terms of Section 149 of the Act, a notice under Section148 of the Act could not be issued. However, the said period was extended bythe Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of CertainProvisions) Act, 2020 . Consequently, the time limit for issuing sucha notice was extended to 30.06.2021. The original notice under Section 148of the Act was issued on 21.06.2021, which was nine (9) days before theexpiry of the period of limitation. 6.As noted above, the said notice was deemed to be a notice underSection 148A(b) of the Act, by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court inUnion of India & Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal (supra). The Supreme Court alsogranted further time to provide the material, which was required toaccompany such notice. As explained by the Supreme Court in the case ofUnion of India v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, the period This is a digitally signed order.from the date of the issuance of the notice till 04.05.2022, the date on whichThe authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2025 at 16:04:43the Supreme Court had rendered the decision in Union of India & Ors. v.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2025 at 16:04:43the Supreme Court had rendered the decision in Union of India & Ors. v. This is a digitally signed order.from the date of the issuance of the notice till 04.05.2022, the date on whichThe authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2025 at 16:04:43the Supreme Court had rendered the decision in Union of India & Ors. v.The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2025 at 16:04:43the Supreme Court had rendered the decision in Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal (supra) is required to be excluded. Additionally, the timeprovided till the date of providing the material, which should haveaccompanied a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, as well as the timeavailable to the assessee to respond to the said notice was also required to beexcluded by virtue of the Third Proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act, asapplicable at the material time. 7.In the present case, the AO had nine (9) days to issue the notice underSection 148 of the Act after receipt of the reply of the Assessee. The saidperiod expired on 29.06.2022. However, the impugned notice was issued on30.07.2022, which is beyond the said period. Thus, the notice was beyond theperiod of limitation as prescribed under Section 149(1) of the Act. 8.Concededly, the said controversy is covered in favour of the Assesseeby the decision of this court in Ram Balram Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. v. IncomeTax Officer and Anr.: Neutral Citation No.: 2025:DHC:547-DB. 9.The present petition is, accordingly, allowed and all proceedingsinitiated pursuant thereto are set aside. VIBHU BAKHRU, J APRIL 24, 2025‘gsr’ TEJAS KARIA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any