Wallstone Ceramic Vs DCIT (Gujarat High Court)
Gujarat High Court held that in respect of the proceedings where the first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) is attracted, the benefit of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation And Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA 2020) will not be available to the revenue.
Facts- In the present petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the respective petitioners have called in question the notice issued by respondent – assessing officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen the assessment in respect of assessment year 2013-14 or assessment year 2014-15 as the case may be. Also challenged are the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
It was submitted that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Keenara Industries Pvt Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer being Special Civil Application No. 17321 of 2021 and allied petitions, decided on 07.02.2023, the question of legality of the notice issued in respect of Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-15 is covered and the impugned notice is without jurisdiction as it is beyond the time limit prescribed.
Conclusion- Allahabad High Court in Rajeev Bansal Vs. Union of India has held that In respect of the proceedings where the first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) is attracted, the benefit of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation And Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA 2020) will not be available to the revenue, or in other words, the relaxation law under TOLA 2020 would not govern the time frame prescribed under the first proviso to Section 149 as inserted by the Finance Act’ 2021, in such cases.
Held that this Court is in agreement with the decision in Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd., of this Court as well with Allahabad High Court decision in Rajeev Bansal. Therefore, the point is no more res integra that all original notices under section 148 of the Act referable to the old regime and issued between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 would stand beyond the prescribed permissible timeline of six years from the end of Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-15. Therefore, all such notices when they would relate to Assessment Year 2013-14 or Assessment Year 2014-15 would be time barred as per the provisions of the Act as applicable in the old regime prior to 01.04.2021. Furthermore, these notices cannot be issued as per the amended provision of the Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
All these Special Civil Applications seeking to challenge the notices issued for re-opening of the assessment for the assessment years concerned under Section 148 and the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
1.1 The petitions involve similar facts and identical issues, therefore, they were heard together to be treated for disposal by this common judgment and order.
1.2 In the facts and circumstances of the case, having regard to the issues involved and with consent and request of learned advocates for the parties, all these Special Civil Applications were taken up for final consideration today.
Rule returnable in each of the Special Civil Applications forthwith. Learned advocate Mrs.Kalpana Raval for the respondent Revenue waives service of Rule in all.
2.1 Heard learned advocate Mr.Dhinal Shah for the petitioners and learned advocate for the respondent.
In the present petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the respective petitioners have called in question the notice issued by respondent – assessing officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen the assessment in respect of assessment year 2013-14 or assessment year 2014-15 as the case may be. Also challenged are the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
3.1 The details of date of notice, date of order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, assessment year, etc., in respect of all the petitioners are given in the table below,
