+W.p.(C) 7153/2023Vk Global Publications Private Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner Of Incometax, Circle 25(1) & Anr

$~116 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 7153/2023VK GLOBAL PUBLICATIONS PRIVATE LTD. .....PetitionerThrough:Mr Ruchesh Sinha, Ms MonalisaMaity, Mr Aakash Saini and MsShilpa Chaudhary, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE 25(1) & ANR......RespondentsThrough:Mr Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr AshviniKumar, Mr Rishabh Nangia and MrGibran, Advocates. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R%28.05.2025 1.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 28.07.2022 [impugned order] passed under Section 148A(d) ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] along with the notice dated 28.07.2022[impugned notice] issued under Section 148 of the Act and furtherproceedings in respect of assessment year 2015-16. 2.The petitioner is a private limited company and the petitioner hadfiled its return of income for the AY 2015-16 on 26.09.2015, declaringincome of ₹49,35,990/-. 3. The Assessing Officer issued a notice dated 29.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Act seeking to reopen the assessment for AY 2015-16.Although the said notice was issued after 31.03.2021, the procedure as prescribed under Section 148A of the Act was not followed, as the noticewas premised on the provisions relating to reassessment as were in forceprior to 31.03.2021. 4.Thereafter, by a communication dated 28.05.2022, the AO referred tothe decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. AshishAgarwal: (2022) 444 ITR 1 and forwarded certain information, which,according to the AO, suggested that the petitioner’s income had escapedassessment. The said communication also mentioned that in terms of theaforementioned decision in Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal(supra), the notice dated 29.06.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Actwas deemed to be a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The petitionerresponded to the said notice on 10.06.2022. 5.The AO passed an order dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) ofthe Act holding that it was a fit case for issuance of a notice under Section148 of the Act in respect of AY 2015-16. The said order was forwarded tothe petitioner along with a notice dated 28.07.2022 issued under Section 148of the Act. 6.The petitioner contends that the proceedings initiated pursuant to theimpugned notice dated 28.07.2022 are required to be set aside in view of theconcession made by the Revenue before the Supreme Court in Union ofIndia and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 INSC 754. 7.It is relevant to refer to paragraph 19(e) and 19(f) from the decision ofthe Supreme Court in Union of India and Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (supra),which sets out the concession as made on behalf of the Revenue: “e. The Finance Act 2021 substituted the old regime for re-assessment with a new regime. The first proviso to Section 149 does not expressly bar the application of TOLA. Section3 of TOLA applies to the entire Income-tax Act, includingSections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the firstproviso to Section 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all thenotices issued between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16,2016-17, and 2017-18 will be within the period of limitationas explained in the tabulation below: f. The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to bedropped as they will not fall for completion during the periodprescribed under TOLA;” “e. The Finance Act 2021 substituted the old regime for re-assessment with a new regime. The first proviso to Section 149 does not expressly bar the application of TOLA. Section3 of TOLA applies to the entire Income-tax Act, includingSections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the firstproviso to Section 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all thenotices issued between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16,2016-17, and 2017-18 will be within the period of limitationas explained in the tabulation below: f. The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to bedropped as they will not fall for completion during the periodprescribed under TOLA;” 8.In view of the above concession, the impugned notice and theproceedings relating thereto are required to be set aside. We may also notethe decision of the Supreme Court in Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v.Central Board of Direct Taxes and Ors.: Civil Appeal No.5177/2025,decided on 02.04.2025. The said appeal arose from orders passed by theHon’ble High Court of Orissa and Cuttack declining to entertain batch ofpetitions filed by the Assessees. The attention of the Supreme Court wasdrawn to the concession made on behalf of the Revenue in Union of India& Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (supra) and noting the same, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals. The relevant extract of the said decision is set outbelow: “4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with hisusual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a threejudge bench decision of this Court in Union of India and Ors.v. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693,more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus:- “19.(f)TheRevenueconcedesthatfortheassessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on orafter April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as theywill not fall for completion during the periodprescribed under the Taxation and other Laws(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions)Act, 2020.” 5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decisionthat is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issuedon or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as theywould not fall for completion during the period prescribedunderthetaxationandotherlaws(RelaxationandAmendment of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing furtheris required to be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so faras the present litigation is concerned is dated 25.6.2021. 6. In view of the aforesaid, in such circumstances referred toabove the original writ petition nos.2446 of 2023, 2543 of2023 and 2544 of 2023 respectively filed before the HighCourt of Orissa at cuttack stands allowed. 9.The notice dated 28.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Actstands quashed and set aside. Concededly, the controversy is covered infavour of the petitioner by the decision of this court in Makemytrip IndiaPvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 16 (1) Delhi &Anr.: Neutral Citation No.: 2025:DHC:1892-DB. 10.The petition is, accordingly, allowed and all proceedings initiatedpursuant thereto are set aside. VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 28, 2025RK TEJAS KARIA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any