High Court declared specific CBDT notifications ultra vires the Income Tax Act and quashed a notice under Section 148 issued on 19.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2016-17, allowing fresh reassessment proceedings thereafter.
Notifications issued by CBDT declared ultra vires; notice dated 19.04.2021 under Section 148 quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
W.P.No.1638/2022 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
CALAMBUR SIVARAMAMURTI KRISHNAMURTI AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS S/O SIVARAMAMURTI 81 MUNIRKA ENCLAVE NELSON MANDELA MARG NEW DELHI - 110 067.
NOW AT: 23/26, SRINIVASA ROAD MYLAPORE, CHENNAI - 600 004.
… PETITIONER
(By Sri Pavan Kumar R.S.V.S., Adv.)
AND:
2
(By Sri K.V.Aravind a/w Sri Dilip.M., Adv.’s)
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ, direction or order I the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ application or order under article 226 of the constitution of India calling for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032524603(1) and quash the impugned notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032524603(1) dated 19/04/2021 (Annexure-F, page no.55) issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and without jurisdiction and pass such further or other orders.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ group this day, Alok Aradhe J. , made the following:
3
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition has sought quashment of explanation below Clause (A) in the notification bearing No.20/2021/F.NO.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 31.03.2021 and notification No.38/2021/ F.No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 27.04.2021 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes, as ultra vires the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1961 Act’, for short) and the provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘2020 Act’, for short). The petitioner has also prayed for relief that extension of time limit by the 2020 Act does not apply to notices issued under erstwhile Section 148 of the 1961 Act, after 01.04.2021. The petitioner also seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 19.04.2021 issued under Section 148 of the 1961 Act for the Assessment year 2016-17.
4
by the Division Bench of High Court of Allahabad in ASHOK KUAR AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA’ , Rajasthan High Court in ‘BPIP INFRA (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR , Delhi High Court decision in MON MOHAN KOHLI VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. and decision of Bombay High Court in TATA COMMUNICATIONS TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED, VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14(1) AND OTHERS, W.P.NO.1334/2021, the explanation below Clause (A) in the notification bearing No.20/2021370142/35/2020-tl dated 31.03.2021 and notification No.38/2021f. No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 27.04.2021 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes is hereby declared as ultra vires the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and the provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. The impugned notice dated 19.04.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act are quashed.
5
amended by Finance Act, 2021 after strictly complying with the provisions of the Act.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
KK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the explanation below Clause (A) in Notification No.20/2021 and No.38/2021 issued by CBDT is ultra vires the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certa
Whether the notice dated 19.04.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment year 2016-17 can be quashed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Alok Aradhe J., judgment dated 19.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.22348/2021Followed¶26
ASHOK KUAR AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIAFollowed¶26
ASHOK KUAR AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA
BPIP INFRA (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPURFollowed¶26
BPIP INFRA (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR
MON MOHAN KOHLI VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.Followed¶26
MON MOHAN KOHLI VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
TATA COMMUNICATIONS TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED, VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14(1) AND OTHERS, W.P.NO.1334/2021Followed¶26
TATA COMMUNICATIONS TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED, VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14(1) AND OTHERS, W.P.NO.1334/2021
2 provisions across 2 enactments
CALAMBUR SIVARAMAMURTI KRISHNAMURTI
THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 (3)(1)
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 3(3)
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3
ALOK ARADHE
S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
