Allowed

Chandra Bhan Agarwal v. Union of India and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2021WTAX/1149/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S Bench dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking quashing of an Income Tax reassessment notice issued under Section 148 relying on pre-Finance Act, 2021 notifications, by upholding a co-ordinate Bench decision, leaving authorities to initiate proceedings under amended law.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 19.04.2021 is quashed, leaving the Assessing Authority to initiate reassessment proceedings in accordance with the Act as amended by Finance Act, 2021.

Chandra Bhan Agarwal Vs Union of India and 2 Others — Income Tax | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1149 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Agarwal Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Bansal,Shalini Goel Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashish Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India, respondent No.1 and Sri Gaurav Mahajan and Sri Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3.

¶6

The petitioner has prayed for quashing of notice dated 19.04.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by respondent No. 3 for the assessment year 2013-14. The impugned notice has been issued in view of notifications dated 31.03.2021 and 27.04.2021 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes whereby the time limit for taking various steps for re-assessment was extended beyond 31.03.2021. The challenge to the impugned notice is based on the contention that by Finance Act, 2021 Section 148-A was inserted and various other Sections were substituted, laying down a completely different procedure for re-assessment. It is submitted that in view of said amendment, re-assessment proceedings, if undertaken, have to be in accordance with the amended provisions whereas the impugned notice was issued as per the notifications issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes which is quite different with the procedure now prescribed.

¶7

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the said issue has been subject matter of consideration by a co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No. 524 of 2021 (Ashok Kumar Agarwal Vs. Union of India and other), 2021 SCC Online All 799 wherein it

¶8

is held that the notifications issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 31.03.2021 and 27.04.2021 have to be read as applicable to re-assessment proceedings as may have been in existence on 31.03.2021 i.e. before the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2021 and accordingly, re-assessment notices in all the writ petitions were quashed.

¶9

It is urged that in the instant case as well, the impugned notice having been issued after the enforcement of the provisions substituted/inserted by Finance Act, 2021 but relying on the notifications of Central Board of Direct Taxes, is thus illegal and cannot be sustained.

¶10

Operative part of the said judgment is as follows :

¶11

"81. In view of the above, all the writ petitions must succeed and are allowed. It is declared that the Ordinance, the Enabling Act and Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, as enforced w.e.f. 01.04.2021, are not conflicted. Insofar as the Explanation appended to Clause A(a), A(b), and the impugned Notifications dated 31.03.2021 and 27.04.2021 (respectively) are concerned, we declare that the said Explanations must be read, as applicable to reassessment proceedings as may have been in existence on 31.03.2021 i.e. before the substitution of Sections 147, 148, 148A, 149, 151 & 151A of the Act. Consequently, the reassessment notices in all the writ petitions are quashed. It is left open to the respective assessing authorities to initiate reassessment proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act as amended by Finance Act, 2021, after making all compliances, as required by law. "

¶12

Sri Gaurav Mahajan and Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Revenue does not dispute that identical notices were subject matter of challenge in the batch of writ petitions decided by the co-ordinate Bench and that the instant petition is squarely covered by the said judgment.

¶13

Accordingly, we quash the impugned notice dated 19.04.2021 leaving it open to the Assessing Authority to initiate re-

¶14

assessment proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act, as amended by Finance Act, 2021 after making all compliances as required by law.

¶15

The writ petition stands allowed .

¶16

(Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Order Date :- 17.12.2021 SL

Chandra Bhan Agarwal v. Union of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Bhan Agarwal v. Union of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India and Another Vs M/S Harinder Singh

Ram Pravesh Tiwari Vs Renu Singh, Sdm

Rajesh Arora and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary,Department of Commercial Tax and 29 Others

M/S Suyash Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sundar Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pragya Publication Private Limited Vs Union of India and 2 Others