Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Ram Narayan Sah (Gauhati High Court)
The Gauhati High Court allowed an interlocutory application filed by the Income Tax Department seeking to bring on record the Supreme Court’s order dated 10.04.2026 in a batch of appeals, including Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & others vs. Tej Pratap Singh.
The original writ petition, W.P.(C) No. 2438/2024, challenged the legality of the order dated 26.03.2024 under Section 148A and the notice dated 26.03.2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by the Jurisdiction Assessing Officer (JAO). The challenge was based on the contention that the JAO lacked authority under Section 151A of the Act and the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022.
By order dated 20.05.2024, the High Court had disposed of the writ petition after observing that reassessment proceedings and issuance of notices under Section 148 were to be carried out through automated allocation and a faceless mechanism, while granting liberty to the Department to issue a fresh notice.
The Court noted that the Supreme Court, by order dated 10.04.2026, had set aside judgments quashing reassessment notices on the limited ground of JAO competence in view of Act No. 4 of 2026 and remitted such matters to the respective High Courts. Since the earlier judgment in the present case had also been set aside by the Supreme Court, the High Court allowed the interlocutory application and restored W.P.(C) No. 2438/2024 to its original file.
Cases Discussed
- Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & others vs. Tej Pratap Singh (SC), Diary No. 2196/2026
- Union of India vs. Ram Narayan Sah (SC), Diary No. 34788/2025
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUWAHATI HIGH COURT
Heard Ms. M.L. Gope, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department for the applicants and Mr. B. Sharma, learned counsel for the sole opposite party.
2. The instant interlocutory application is preferred to bring on notice an Order dated 10.04.2026 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a batch of thousands of appeals including one civil appeal with Diary no. 2196/2026 [Income Tax Officer, Ward 2[1] Chandigarh & others vs. Tej Pratap Singh].
3. The sole opposite party as the writ petitioner had preferred a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 2438/2024 assailing the legality and validity of an Order dated 26.03.2024 issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as amended, and a Notice dated 26.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the said Act by the Jurisdiction Assessing officer [JAO]. The assail is made on the ground that the impugned Order dated 26.03.2024 was passed by the JAO contrary to the provisions of Section 151A of the Income Tax Act and as required by the provisions of the said Act.
4. The writ petition came up for consideration on 20.05.2024 and after hearing the parties and taking into consideration the provisions of Section 151A of the Act and the Scheme, E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 notified vide a Notification dated 29.03.2022, the Court had observed that the Scheme was for the purpose of assessment, re-assessment and computation under Section 147 and for issuance of notices under Section 148, which were to be carried out through automated allocation and faceless mechanism. The writ petition was disposed of by an Order dated 20.05.2024 with liberty to the Departmental authorities to issue fresh notice so as to enable the petitioner to file their appropriate reply under the provisions of Section 148.
5. The Order dated 10.04.2026 was passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a batch of thousands of appeal originated from different High Courts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court after considering the provisions of the Scheme and the related provisions regarding automated allocations and faceless mechanism had observed that since the High Court had primarily quashed the reassessment notice on the ground that the JAOs lacked the competence to initiate such proceedings and the foundation of that view stood altered by amending Legislation, i.e. the Act no. 4 of 2026, the impugned judgments delivered in favour of the assesses were set aside on such limited ground and the matters were remitted to the respective High Courts for fresh consideration.
4. In paragraph 3 of the application, it is averred that against the Judgment and Order dated 20.05.2024 passed in W.P.[C] no. 2438/2024, the Department had preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same was registered as Diary no. 34788/2025 [Union of India vs. Ram Narayan Sah] and the said Diary no. was one of the thousands of appeals wherein the Order dated 10.04.2026 was passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
6. In view of such obtaining fact situation, it is observed that the Judgment and Order dated 20.05.2024 passed in W.P.[C] no. 2438/2024 has been set aside by the Order dated 10.04.2026. Consequently, the interlocutory application stands allowed. As a result, the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 2438/2024 is to be restored in its original number on record.
Author Bio
