Facts
of the Case
The
petitioner, Manisha Agarwal, challenged the notice dated 08.06.2021 deemed to
be a show cause notice under Section 148A(b), the subsequent notices dated
18.05.2022, the order dated 25.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d), and the
consequential notice issued under Section 148 for Assessment Year 2014–15. The
petitioner also questioned the validity of Instruction No. 1/2022 dated
11.05.2022 to the extent it permitted issuance of reassessment notices for
earlier assessment years. The reassessment proceedings arose pursuant to the
Supreme Court judgment in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, whereby notices
issued under the old regime were deemed to be notices under the new regime.
Issues
Involved
Whether
the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 on 25.07.2022 for AY 2014–15
was barred by limitation after applying the legal fiction created in Ashish
Agarwal, whether the surviving limitation period stood exhausted in terms of
the Supreme Court judgment in Rajeev Bansal, and whether the entire
reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The
petitioner contended that the original notice dated 08.06.2021 under Section
148 was deemed to be a show cause notice under Section 148A(b). The surviving
limitation period from 08.06.2021 to 30.06.2021 was only 22 days. It was
submitted that the period between 08.06.2021 and 16.06.2022 was liable to be
excluded in terms of the third proviso to Section 149, and therefore the last
permissible date for issuance of notice under Section 148 was 08.07.2022. Since
the actual notice was issued on 25.07.2022, the proceedings were barred by
limitation. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Rajeev Bansal.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The
Revenue did not dispute the limitation computation advanced by the petitioner
and was unable to demonstrate any legal basis to justify issuance of the notice
dated 25.07.2022 beyond the surviving limitation period.
Court
Order / Findings
The
Delhi High Court held that the issue was squarely covered by the Supreme Court
judgment in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal. The Court accepted the limitation
chart placed on record, which demonstrated that only 22 days of limitation survived
after issuance of the deemed show cause notice. The Court held that once the
clock restarted on 16.06.2022 after exclusion of the deemed stay period, the
Revenue was required to issue notice under Section 148 within the surviving 22
days. Issuance of notice on 25.07.2022 was therefore held to be clearly
time-barred. The Court also noted that a final assessment order had been passed
during pendency of the writ petition, which could not survive once the
foundational reassessment proceedings were invalid.
Important
Clarification
The
Court clarified that reassessment notices issued pursuant to the legal fiction
created in Ashish Agarwal must strictly comply with the surviving limitation
period as computed under the Income-tax Act read with TOLA. Any notice issued
beyond such surviving period is without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside
along with all consequential proceedings.
Final
Outcome
The
writ petition was allowed. The order dated 25.07.2022 passed under Section
148A(d), the notice dated 25.07.2022 issued under Section 148 for Assessment
Year 2014–15, and the final assessment order passed pursuant thereto were all
set aside. The reassessment proceedings were held to be barred by limitation,
and the petition was disposed of accordingly.
Link to Download Order- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769505482_MANISHAAGARWALVsINCOMETAXOFFICERWARD591DELHIANDORS..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