Sharda Jain Vs PCIT-1 (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur, in Sharda Jain Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 and thirteen connected writ petitions, quashed reassessment orders issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, together with consequential notices issued under Section 148. Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey passed the common order on 12 February 2026, relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Union of India Vs Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC), and Deepak Steel and Power Limited Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes & Others, 305 Taxman 169 (SC). The High Court held that the reassessment proceedings were governed by the legal position established in those decisions concerning notices issued for Assessment Year 2015-16 on or after 1 April 2021.
The petitions, including those filed by Sharda Jain, Satyanarayan Nathulal, Riddhi Agro Industries, Vinod Kumar Agrawal, Balajee Structural (India) Private Limited, Suraj Pulses, Arvind Surana, Rajiv Kumar and Brothers, MM Wonder Park Private Limited, Anil Kumar Agrawal, Shree Shivam Attires Pvt. Ltd., Harshaa Rice Mills Private Limited, Orissa Bengal Carrier Limited and Balajee Loha Private Limited, raised similar legal issues relating to reassessment proceedings. The Court therefore heard and disposed of all fourteen petitions through a common order.
The Court referred specifically to paragraph 19(f) of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Union of India Vs Rajeev Bansal, which recorded the Revenue’s concession that all reassessment notices issued for Assessment Year 2015-16 on or after 1 April 2021 would have to be dropped, as they would not fall within the period prescribed under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA).
The High Court further relied on Deepak Steel and Power Limited Vs CBDT, in which the Supreme Court applied the same concession and held that nothing further required adjudication where the relevant notice was dated 25 June 2021. Applying these binding rulings, the Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the impugned orders under Section 148A(d) and notices under Section 148, and disposed of all the writ petitions. The judgment does not separately examine the factual merits of the proposed reassessments.
List of Cases Discussed:
1. Union of India Vs Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (Supreme Court): The High Court relied on paragraph 19(f), recording the Revenue’s concession that notices for AY 2015-16 issued on or after 1 April 2021 must be dropped.
2. Deepak Steel and Power Limited Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes & Others, 305 Taxman 169 (Supreme Court): Followed for quashing reassessment proceedings for AY 2015-16 where notices were issued after the applicable cut-off date.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORIGINAL JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
1. This Bunch of writ petitions deals with similar issues and points of law and are, accordingly, dealt by this Court jointly.
2. With regard to notices issued for assessment year 2015-16, in the matter of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal reported in (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) considered before the Honb’le Supreme Court in para 19(f) as under :-
“19 f. The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA.”
3. Further in the matter of Deepak Steel and Power Limited vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors. reported in 305 Taxman 169 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with the order passed under Section 148(A)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “Act, 1961”) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 in para 5 held has under :-
“5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decision that is for the assessment year 2015-16, all notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is required to be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so far as the present litigation is concerned is dated 25.06.2021.”
4. Taking into consideration the reassessment proceedings made by the revenue and observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Deepak Steel (supra) the orders issued under Section 148 (A)(d) Act, 1961 and notices issued under Section 148 of Act, 1961 are hereby quashed.
5. With the above observations and directions, all the writ petitions are disposed of.
