Facts of the Case
The petitions before the Delhi High Court concerned
reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18.
In the illustrative case considered by the Court,
the assessee had filed the return of income for AY 2017-18 which was processed
under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961. Subsequently, after the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal, the
Revenue issued a notice under Section
148A(b) alleging that certain income had escaped assessment.
The assessee filed a reply to the notice.
Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 148A(d) concluding that a substantial amount of income had
escaped assessment and issued a consequential notice under Section 148 for reassessment.
The assessees challenged these reassessment notices before the Delhi High Court mainly on the ground that the proceedings were initiated without the approval of the “specified authority” as required under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act.
Issues Involved
- Whether reassessment notices issued under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are
valid when prior approval of the specified
authority under Section 151 is not obtained.
- Whether reliance on the Taxation
and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020
(TOLA) and CBDT instructions could cure the defect relating to lack
of statutory approval.
- Whether reassessment proceedings initiated without such approval violate the statutory mandate under the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The reassessment notices were illegal and unsustainable because they were issued without
the mandatory approval of the specified
authority under Section
151(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
- The statute clearly requires prior approval before issuing notices
under Section 148 after the
amendments introduced by the Finance
Act, 2021.
- The Revenue authorities initiated reassessment proceedings based on
approvals granted by an authority not
competent under the Act, rendering the entire proceedings void.
- Reliance on administrative instructions or TOLA cannot override the mandatory requirement prescribed under the Act.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated in compliance with the
provisions introduced after the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2023)
1 SCC 617.
- The department relied on provisions of TOLA and CBDT
Instruction No.1/2022 dated 11.05.2022, which permitted
continuation of reassessment proceedings in certain circumstances.
- According to the Revenue, approval obtained in the present cases should be considered sufficient compliance with the statutory framework.
Court Findings
- The requirement of prior
approval of the specified authority under Section 151 is mandatory before issuing a notice
under Section 148.
- The reassessment process must strictly follow the statutory
procedure provided under the amended provisions of the Act.
- The argument of the Revenue that approval of the specified
authority is not mandatory was rejected as being contrary to the provisions of the Act.
- Since the reassessment notices and orders were issued without proper approval from the competent authority, the proceedings were not sustainable in law.
Court Order
The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petitions and held that reassessment notices issued without obtaining approval from the specified authority under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act are invalid and liable to be set aside.
Important Clarification by the Court
- Compliance with statutory
safeguards in reassessment proceedings is mandatory.
- Administrative instructions, departmental circulars, or reliance on
TOLA cannot override the explicit
requirements of the Income Tax Act.
- Approval must be obtained from the correct statutory authority designated under Section 151, failing which the reassessment proceedings will be invalid.
Link to download the order
- https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS05012024CW165242022_114311.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment