Vikram Kapahi Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition challenging the notice dated 29.03.2024 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the order dated 16.04.2024 passed under Section 148A(d), and the notice dated 16.04.2024 issued under Section 148 for AY 2016-17. The petitioner contended that the Section 148 notice was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period.
The Court noted that the controversy was covered in favour of the petitioner by its decision in Manju Somani v. Income Tax Officer Ward-70(1) & Ors., Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:5411-DB, and referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Union of India & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal: 2024 SCC Online SC 2693. The Supreme Court had held that, for assessment years beginning on or before 1 April 2021, a notice under the new reassessment regime could not be issued where the limitation available under the old Section 149(1)(b) had expired. The six-year limitation period was therefore relevant for AY 2016-17 and expired on 31.03.2023.
The Revenue argued that the period during which the petitioner’s earlier challenge was pending should be excluded because the Court had stayed the reassessment proceedings. The earlier proceedings arose from a notice dated 26.07.2022 under Section 148 concerning AY 2016-17. That notice had itself followed an earlier notice dated 29.06.2021 issued under the pre-01.04.2021 regime. Following the Supreme Court’s directions in Union of India and Ors. v. Ashish Agarwal: (2023) 1 SCC 617, the earlier notice was treated under the Section 148A framework, material was supplied to the petitioner, and a fresh order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148 were issued.
