M/s.Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Private Ltd. Vs The Central board of Direct Taxes

¶1

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN

¶6

WP No. 23508 of 2022 AND

¶7

WMP NO. 22467 OF 2022,WMP NO. 22468 OF 2022

¶8

M/s.Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Private Ltd represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr. Sridhar Swaminathan, NO.489, GNT Road, Thandalakazhani, Vadagarai Po, Redhills, Chennai - 600052.

¶9

Petitioner(s)

¶10

Vs

¶11

The Central board of Direct Taxes represented by its Chairperson, Department of Revenue - Ministry of Finance Government of india, New Delhi.

¶12

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle -3(1), Chennai, No. 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶15

3.The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,

¶16

No. 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034.

¶17

Respondent(s)

¶18

PRAYER

¶19

calling for the records in PAN AACCG6027C and quash the impugned order u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in ITBA/COM/F/17/202223/1044248268(1) dated 28.07.2022 passed by the 2nd Respondent and the consequential notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in ITBA/AST/M/148_11/2022-23/1044265947(1) dated 29.07.2022 issued by the 2nd Respondent for the AY 2014-15 as illegal and without jurisdiction

¶20

For Petitioner(s): R.Sivaraman P.Rameshkumar S.Srividya Raghav Rajeev Menon S.Gautham Venkata Narayanan For Respondent(s): Mr. A.P. Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel and Mr.ANR Jayaprathap Junior Standing Counsel

¶21

ORDER

¶22

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order

¶23

under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28.07.2022 and

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶26

consequential notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.07.2022 for the assessment year April 2014- March 15. The facts on

¶27

record reveal that the petitioner had earlier suffered an adverse order under Section 201(1) / 201 (1A) on 31.03.2021.

¶28

The aforesaid order is the basis of a notice dated 19.05.2022 issued

¶29

under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which has now resulted in

¶30

the impugned order dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) and the impugned

¶31

notice under Section 148 dated 29.07.2022.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in so far as the demand covered by the order dated 31.03.2021 passed under Section 201(1) / 201 (1A) is concerned, the petitioner has opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme by filing a declaration in Form 1 dated 31.01.2025, which is after the interim order was passed by this Court in this

¶33

Writ Petition.

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶36

The aforesaid Form 1 was also accepted with issuance of Form 2 on

¶37

31.05.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner also enclosed a copy of the

¶38

same, indicating that the case has been settled.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that although the

¶40

petitioner has several other grounds to assail the impugned proceedings in this writ petition, the issue now squarely stands covered by clarification in S.No.22 to Circular No.12/2024 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) bearing reference F.No.370142/22/2024-TPL, which is a guidance note No.1/2024

¶41

regarding the provisions of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.

¶42

Specifically, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in

¶43

terms of the S.No.22, above clarification, disallowance under Section 40(a)(i)(ia) of the Act cannot be sustained as the petitioner has already settled

¶44

the liability under Section 201 of the Act under the Direct Tax Vivad Se

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶47

Vishwas Scheme, 2024. It is therefore submitted that the impugned proceedings

¶48

are liable to be interfered with.

¶49

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents would

¶50

submit that the present writ petition is premature and therefore, it is liable to be

¶51

dismissed. That apart, it is submitted that the assessment is squarely covered by

¶52

the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev

¶53

Bansal., 2024 SCC Online SC 2693 in paragraph No.114, which reads as

¶54

under:

¶55

“ 114. In view of the above discussion, we conclude

¶56

that:

¶57

(a) After April 1, 2021, the Income-tax Act has to be read along with the substituted provisions;

¶58

(b) Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will continue to apply to the Income-tax Act after April 1, 2021 if any action or proceeding specified under the substituted provisions of the Income-tax Act falls for completion between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021;

¶59

(c) Section 3(1) of the Taxation and other Laws

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶62

(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 overrides section 149 of the Income-tax Act only to the extent of relaxing the time limit for issuance of a reassessment notice under section 148;

¶63

(d) Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will extend the time limit for the grant of sanction by the authority specified under section 151. The test to determine whether Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 will apply to section 151 of the new regime is this : if the time limit of three years from the end of an assessment year falls between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021, then the specified authority under section 151(i) has extended time till June 30, 2021 to grant approval ;

¶64

(e) In the case of section 151 of the old regime, the test is : if the time limit of four years from the end of an assessment year falls between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021, then the specified authority under section 151(2) has extended time till March 31, 2021 to grant approval;

¶65

(f) The directions in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] will extend to all the ninety thousand reassessment notices issued under the old regime during the period April 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021;

¶66

(g) The time during which the show-cause notices were deemed to be stayed is from the date of issuance of the deemed notice between April 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021 till the supply of relevant information and material by the

¶67

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶68

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶69

Assessing Officers to the assessees in terms of the directions issued by this court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal [(2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC); (2023) 1 SCC 617.] , and the period of two weeks allowed to the assessees to respond to the showcause notices; and

¶70

(h) The Assessing Officers were required to issue the reassessment notice under section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income-tax Act read with the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside;

¶71

That apart, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that

¶72

the petitioner has now brought these additional facts, which are not pleaded in

¶73

the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition and they are subsequent to the filing of the writ petition and hence, submits that the writ petition is liable to be

¶74

dismissed.

¶75

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

¶76

petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition deserves

¶77

to be disposed of by directing the respondents to pass fresh orders in the light of

¶78

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶79

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶80

the case having been settled by the petitioner under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 particularly in the light of the clarification in S.No.22 to the above instruction F.No.370142/22/2024-TPL, which is a guidance note No.1/2024 regarding the provisions of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 same is reproduced hereunder:

¶81

In case the respondents want to proceed against the Petitioner despite

¶82

the above clarification, they may give a notice to the petitioner to raise all

¶83

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶84

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶85

grounds that are available in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme

¶86

Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal., 2024 SCC Online SC 2693.

¶87

This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No

¶88

costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶89

04-11-2025

¶90

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶91

ab

¶92

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶93

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶94

WP No. 23508 of 2022

¶95

To

¶96

1.The Central board of Direct Taxes represented by its Chairperson, Department of Revenue - Ministry of Finance Government of india, New Delhi.

¶97

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle -3(1), Chennai, No. 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034. 3.The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, No. 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600034.

¶98

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No. 23508 of 2022

C.SARAVANAN J.

ab

WP No. 23508 of 2022 AND WMP NO. 22467 OF 2022,WMP NO. 22468 OF 2022

¶103

04-11-2025